i:^  ot  o^  5:^  .^£:^  ^:b.  ^:2^ 

UK   TllK 
AT 

PRINCETON,   N.  J. 

x»  c»  :>r  --^  Ti"  I  c»  >;     <»  i.- 

SAMUEL    AONEW, 

OF     P  H  1  I,  A  I)  E  I.  P  H  I  A  .     PA. 

q4^o 


BX  9843  .J8  C5 
Judd,  Sylvester,  1813-1853 
The  Church,  in  a  series  of 
discourses 


THE    CHUECH 


A   SERIES   OF   DISCOURSES 


) 


Rev.    SYLVESTER    JUDD, 

PASTOR  OP  CHRIST  CHURCH,   AUGUSTA,   MAINE. 


"In  promoting  the  influence  of  Christianity,  the  main  duty  of  an  enlightened 
Christian  at  the  present  day  is  to  labor  tliat  it  may  be  better  understood ;  and  the 
views  and  results  to  which  a  few  intelligent  scholars  may  have  arrived  must  be  made 
the  common  property  of  the  community."  —  Andrews  Norton. 


BOSTON: 

CROSBY,    NICHOLS,    AND    COMPANY, 

in  Washington  Street. 
1854. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1854,  by 

Crosby,    Nichols,    and    Compa>'y, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetta. 


CAMBRIDGE: 
METCALP  AND   COMPANY,  PRINTERS  TO  THE  UXITIRSITV. 


EDITOR'S   PREFACE. 


The  publication  of  this  volume  of  Sermons  is  the 
result  of  several  considerations.  The  one  which  I 
have  felt  to  be  most  important,  and  which  is  entirely 
proper  to  be  stated  here,  arises  from  the  fact  that  the 
author  himself  intended  to  give  some  or  all  of  them 
to  the  press,  in  connection  with  others  on  kindred 
topics,  which  he  was  expecting  his  clerical  brethren 
in  Maine  would  contribute  to  the  object  he  had  in 
view.  This  purpose  appears  in  a  letter  which  he  ad- 
dressed, about  a  month  before  his  decease,  to  his 
highly  valued  friend,  Rev.  Cazneau  Palfrey,  of  Bel- 
^fast.     In  it  he  writes  as  follows  :  — 

"  It  has  seemed  to  me  that  we  ought  to  publish  to 
the  world  some  of  our  Church  principles,  views,  and 
plans.  There  is  a  spirit  of  inquiry  awake,  yet  there  is 
hardly  a  printed  word  that  can  be  got  hold  of.  Our 
own  people,  no  less  than  others,  need  to  see  the 
thing  in  print.     It  is  matter  to  be  pondered.     The 


IV  PREFACE. 

*  Report'  of  our  State  Convention  at  Portland* 
does  not  explain  itself  to  anybody.  I  am  sorry  no 
'  notes '  accompanied  it. 

"  I  propose  that  there  be  published  a  book  of  this 
sort :  '  The  Church :  in  a  Series  of  Discourses,  by 
several  Clergymen  of  the  Unitarian  Church  of  Maine.' 
I  am  willing  to  take  all  the  risk  of  publication.  What 
I  want  is,  that  any  of  us,  whose  minds  have  been 
exercised  on  the  subject,  should  give  the  public  a 
Discourse  upon  it,  —  you  take  up  one  point,  I  anoth- 
er, and  so  on.  I  want  we  should  show  a  kind  of 
organic,  unitary  front.  For  my  own  part,  I  have 
several  Discourses  which  I  might  put  into  such  a 
volume." 

I  have  no  special  clew  to  the  particular  sermons 
which  Mr.  Judd  regarded  as  best  expressing  the 
views  he  desired  to  commend  to  general  notice,  and 
I  am  not  sure  that  my  selection  is  such  a  one  as  he 
would  have  made  for  himself.  Still,  I  feel  no  hesi- 
tation in  offering  the  following  Sermons  to  the  public, 
as  I  can  hardly  be  mistaken  in  supposing  they  come 
fully  within  the  scope  of  the  plan  indicated  in  the 
letter  from  which  I  have  quoted.  They  appear  to 
me  to  stand  symmetrically  around  the  central  point 
of  interest,  and  I  believe  there  will  be  found  in  them 

"*  Sec  Appendix,  Note  A. 


/  PREFACE.  V 

a  unity  and  logical  connection  with  each  other,  and 
an  exactness  of  statement  and  fulness  of  illustration, 
quite  sufficient  to  enable  the  general  reader  to  under- 
stand the  author's  true  position  on  the  topics  which 
he  has  treated,  and  to  take  from  every  fair-minded 
person  all  excuse  for  any  misapprehension  or  mis- 
representation of  his  general  drift  and  real  aim. 
While  they  are  eminently  didactic  in  their  character, 
they  are  yet  wholly  unaipbitious  in  style,  and  were, 
in  fact,  prepared  and  delivered  in  the  usual  course 
of  ministerial  labor.  But  the  earnestness  and  pro- 
found sincerity  of  their  tone  are  calculated  to  fix  the 
attention,  when  once  enlisted,  on  the  great  theme 
which  he  discusses,  and  hold  it  until  the  whole 
series  shall  be  perused.  Such,  at  least,  is  the  hope 
in  which  the  volume  is  now  committed  to  the  pub- 
lic. 

JOSEPH  H.  WILLIAMS. 
Augusta,  January  6,  1854. 


CONTENTS 


SEKMON   I. 


PAGE 
CHRISTIAN   BAPTISM     ....  ....  1 


SERMON   n. 

GOSPEL   CONVEESION 15 

SERMOX   III. 

CHRISTIAN   OBLIGATIONS   UNIVERSAL 29 

SERMON   IV. 

WHAT   IS   THE   CHURCH  ? 48 

SERMON    V. 

BIRTH-RELATION   TO    THE    CHURCH 61 

SERMON   VI. 

THE    CHURCH,  ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE   FAMILY  AND    THE   STATE        83 

SERMON   VII. 

THE    CHURCH   HEREDITABLE  . 103 


via  CONTENTS. 


SERMON    VIII. 

WE    SEND   CHILDREN  TO  HEAVEN,  BUT  DAHE  NOT  ADMIT   THEM 

TO   THE    CHUKCH 139 


SERMON   IX. 

CHILDBEN  TO  BE  COMMUNICANTS 149 

SERMON    X. 

EDUCATION,   CONSIDERED   AS    THE   GREAT    CHRISTIAN   LAW        .      178 

SERMON   XI. 

"  WE   THINK   IN  WORDS  " 199 

SERMON    XII. 

THE   SABBATH   SCHOOL .      225 

SERMON   XIII. 

THE    COMMUNION 239 

SERMON   XIV. 

THE  gospel:  good  NEWS  TO  ALL  PEOPLE    ....   255 
APPENDIX 273 


SEEMONS 


SERMON   I 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

I  INDEED  BAPTIZE  TOU  WITH  WATER  UNTO  EEPEXTANCE  ;  BUT 
HE  THAT  COMETH  AFTER  ME  IS  MIGHTIER  THAN  I,  WHOSE  SHOES 
I  AM  NOT  WORTHY  TO  BEAR  :  HE  SHALL  BAPTIZE  TOU  WITH 
THE   HOLT   GHOST,   AND  WITH   FIRE. —Matt   iii.  11. 

My  subject  to-day  is  Baptism.  I  purpose  to  ex- 
plain the  meaning  of  that  which  so  often  appears  in 
the  New  Testament  under  this  name.  I  venture  to 
affirm  that  Christian  baptism,  that  is,  the  baptism 
introduced  and  enjoined  by  Christ,  imports  a  cer- 
tain spiritual  effect,  and  not  a  watery  application ; 
that  the  essential  idea  of  the  term  is  spiritual ;  that 
the  use  of  water  is  non-essential. 

"  Baptizing  with  fire  "  signifies  the  cleansing,  puri- 
fying, enlightening,  beautifying  nature  of  Christ's 
baptism,  its  vivifying  and  ennobling  power.  It  is 
represented  by  fire,  says  Adam  Clark,  "  because  it 
was  to  illuminate  and  invigorate  the  soul,  penetrate 
every  part,  and  assimilate  the  whole  to  the  image  of 
God."  The  Fathers  abound  in  gross  and  fanciful 
conceptions  bn  the  subject.  Origen  and  Lactantius 
supposed  there  was  a  river  of  fire,  like  the  Phlege- 


4  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM 

thon  of  the  heathen,  through  which  men  were  to 
pass.  Chrysostom  approaches  a  more  reasonable 
view,  w^hen  he  says  the  word  denotes  the  superabun- 
dant graces  of  the  spirit. 

"  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
with  fire."  The  definite  article  is  wanting  in  the 
original  of  the  text.  The  term  "Holy  Ghost"  in 
many  cases  in  the  New  Testament  means  holiness, 
or  the  conjoint  product  of  man's  spirit  and  God's 
spirit.  He  shall  baptize  you  with  holiness  and  with 
fire,  is  a  form  of  expression  which  gives  some  idea 
of  the  purport  of  the  passage.  "  It  is  impossible," 
says  Dr.  Furness,  "  to  convey  the  full  force  of  this 
word  Ghost  or  Spirit  in  a  translation.  The  original 
word  is  more  comprehensive  than  the  word  "  Spirit." 
It  signifies  also  air,  wind ;  and  the  meaning  of 
John  is,  "  Water  is  the  symbol  of  my  office,  but  the 
power  of  him  who  is  coming  after  me  may  be  signi- 
fied by  far  subtler  and  more  searching  elements,  wind 
and  fire."  The  spirit  of  the  passage,  then,  I  take  to 
be  this :  He  shall  baptize  you  with  that  which  is 
holy  and  pure,  with  that  which  cleanses  and  refines, 
elevates  and  sanctifies. 

1.  Our  text,  then,  affirms  that  Christ's  baptism 
was  spiritual,  and  not  aqueous.  I  indeed  baptize 
you  with  water,  but  he  that  cometh  after  me  shall 
baptize  you  wath  something  else,  "  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  with  fire."  John,  the  forerunner  of  Christ, 
practised  water  baptism.  Jerusalem,  and  all  Judea, 
and  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,  went  out  to 
him,  and  were  baptized  of  him  in  Jordan.  Yet  he 
says.   One    mightier  than  I  approaches,  one  whose 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  '  S 

shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  bear,  one  so  much  superior 
to  me  that  I  am  not  fit  to  perform  his  most  menial 
offices.  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water,  but  he 
shall  give  you  a  loftier  baptism,  "with  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  with  fire."  He  expressly  distinguishes 
Christ's  baptism  from  his  own  ;  he  characterizes  it  as 
something  greater;  nay,  his  language  is  pointedly 
significant  of  the  fact  that  Christ's  baptism  is  not  of 
water,  but  of  the  spirit.  Whether  John  be  deemed 
capable  of  forming  an  infallible  judgment  in  the 
case,  is  a  point  I  shall  not  discuss.  The  mothers  of 
John  and  of  Jesus  were  cousins,  and  for  some  time 
abode  together.  Even  if  we  suppose  John  to  have 
been  without  the  aid  of  supernatural  grace,  still  he 
had  the  means  of  knowing  much  of  Christ.  Doubt- 
less they  often  visited  each  other,  and  became  ac- 
quainted with  each  other's  character  and  purposes. 
John  ingenuously  owned  the  superiority  of  Christ, 
and  fully  testified  to  the  greatness  of  his  mission. 
He  felt  that  Christ's  baptism  would  as  greatly  excel 
his  own,  as  the  endowments  of  the  Son  of  Mary  were 
diviner  than  his.  Let  me  refer  to  the  striking  lan- 
guage which  he  uses.  "  After  me  cometh  a  man 
which  is  preferred  before  me,  ....  and  I  knew  him 
not  (i.  e.  as  the  Messiah)  ;  but  that  he  should  be  made 
manifest  to  Israel,  therefore  am  I  come  baptizing 
with  water.  But  he  that  sent  me  to  baptize  with 
water,  the  same  said  unto  me.  Upon  whom  thou 
shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining 
on  him,  the  same  is  he  which  baptizeth  with  the 
Holy  Ghost."  John,  it  will  be  observed,  takes  ex- 
treme pains  to  distinguish  Christ  from  himself,  espe- 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 


cially  in  this  matter  of  baptism.  He  speaks  of  him- 
self continually  as  a  Water-Baptist,  and  sets  Christ 
in  contrast  as  a  Spirit-Baptist.  He  signalizes  Christ 
as  "  he  which  baptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  He 
does  not  call  him  by  name,  but  speaks  of  him  as 
"  a  man,"  and  then  distinguishes  him  by  the  unique 
and  exalted  title  of  Baptizer  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  I  point  to  the  example  of 
Christ.  He  never  practised  water  baptism.  "  Jesus 
himself  baptized  not,"  is  the  unqualified  declaration 
of  the  Evangelist.  Christ  did  not  baptize  John,  but 
John  baptized  Christ,  that  is,  with  water.  John 
wished  Christ  to  baptize  him,  but  he  would  not.  To 
none  of  his  disciples,  to  no  one  even  of  the  twelve, 
nor  to  Martha  or  IMary,  did  Christ  ever  apply  the 
baptism  of  water,  either  in  the  way  of  sprinkling, 
pouring,  or  immersion.  He  did,  indeed,  employ  a 
kind  of  baptism,  but  what  was  it  ?  A  baptism  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  fire,  a  baptism  of  the  spirit, 
an  effusion  of  spiritual  influences,  an  immersion  in 
Light  and  Love. 

Again,  in  the  interval  between  the  resurrection  and 
the  ascension  of  our  Lord,  he  addressed  his  disciples 
in  this  wise.  Bidding  them  to  .wait  for  the  promise 
of  the  Father,  he  adds,  "  For  John  truly  baptized 
with  water ;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy 
Ghost  not  many  days  hence."  Here  is  the  same  dis- 
tinction pointedly  maintained  between  John's  bap- 
tism and  this  other;  between  water-baptism  and 
spirit-baptism.  The  occasion  was  Christ's  last  inter- 
view with  his  disciples  ;  he  was  soon  to  leave  them 
in  this  world  for  ever.     He  does  not  say,  "  Now  let 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  O 

me  baptize  you  ;  you  need  to  be  sprinkled  or  im- 
mersed ;  I  have  never  performed  this  rite  on  you  ; 
you  are  yet  unbaptized."  No.  But  he  says,  John 
indeed  baptized  with  water,  but  you,  my  own  disci- 
ples, look  for  a  higher  baptism  ;  in  a  little  while  that 
higher  baptism  shall  come.  "  Ye  shall  be  baptized 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence."  Could 
language  convey  in  stronger  terms  the  great  idea  that 
Christian  baptism  is  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  not 
with  water? 

3.  Again :  I  maintain  the  doctrine  of  this  dis- 
course from  the  language  of  St.  Peter  and  the  con- 
duct of  St.  Paul.  St.  Paul,  in  his  letter  to  the 
Corinthians,  says  :  "  I  thank  God  that  I  baptized 
none  of  you  but  Crispus  and  Gains,  and  the  house- 
hold of  Stephanas  ;  besides,  I  know  not  whether  I 
baptized  any  other.  For  Christ  sent  me  not  to  bap- 
tize, but  to  preach  the  Gospel."  Paul  was  the  first 
teacher  of  Christianity  in  Corinth  ;  he  founded  a 
church  in  that  city  ;  he  made  many  believers ;  yet  it 
appears  he  baptized  no  more  than  four  or  five  ;  he 
asserts  that  baptizing  was  not  a  part  of  his  commis- 
sion ;  he  avows  not  only  an  indifference  to  that  rite, 
but  even  congratulates  himself  before  God  that  he 
had  not  practised  it,  declaring  that  he  has  higher 
ends  in  view.  Can  we  do  otherwise  than  conclude, 
from  this,  that  water-baptism  was  in  Paul's  mind  of 
small  account?  Of  St.  Peter,  we  may  say  that  he 
appears  not  to  have  entertained  a  perfect  conception 
of  Christ's  spiritual  baptism  till  after  his  remarkable 
vision  mentioned  in  Acts  x.  In  the  account  which 
Peter  gives  of  this  event  he  says.  Moved  by  the 
1  * 


6  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

heavenly  voice,  I  went  to  Cesarea,  to  the  house  of 
Cornelius  the  centurion,  "  and  as  I  began  to  speak, 
the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the  begin- 
ning. Then  remembered  I  the  word  of  the  Lord, 
how  that  he  said,  John  indeed  baptized  with  water ; 
but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  It 
seems  now  for  the  first  time  to  have  dawned  upon 
'  Peter,  that  the  real  baptism  was  of  the  spirit,  a 
baptism  of  the  soul  rather  than  of  the  flesh.  He 
begins  to  realize  the  full  import  of  our  Saviour's 
words. 

4.  In  the  fourth  place,  I  would  refer  to  a  passage 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  writer  exhorts 
us  to  leave  certain  things  and  go  on  unto  perfection. 
These  certain  things  are  denominated  in  our  version 
"  principles  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ,"  or,  literally, 
"  the  word  of  the  beginning,"  by  which  is  intended 
the  rudiments,  the  a,  h^  c  of  religious  attainment. 
Among  the  things  we  are  to  leave  is  "  the  doctrine 
of  baptisms."  Whether  this  signifies  what  we  now 
understand  by  sprinkling  or  immersion,  it  seems  im- 
possible perfectly  to  ascertain.  Yet  something  of 
this  sort  I  think  is  hinted  at.  If  this  be  so,  we  are 
admonished  to  leave  it  (baptism)  as  an  inferior  good  ; 
to  drop  the  subject,  and  go  on  to  perfection,  to  some- 
thing higher  and  better. 

5.  But,  however  this  may  be,  manifestly  the  gen- 
eral  drift  of  the  Gospel  is  spiritual,  and  not  mate- 
rial ;  it  opposes  the  supremacy  of  form,  and  favors 
the  inward  life.  "  In  Christ  Jesus  neither  circum- 
cision availeth  any  thing,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a 
new  creature."     This  is  a  cardinal  maxim  of  Chris- 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  7 

tianity,  and  is  as  applicable  to  baptism  as  to  any 
thing  else.  What  circumcision  was  under  the  old 
dispensation,  baptism  was  liable  to  become  under 
the  new.  In  fact,  it  did  proceed  to  occupy  the  same 
place.  As,  among  the  Jews,  one  could  not  be  saved 
unless  he  were  circumcised,  so  it  came  to  be  a  received 
doctrine  of  the  Church  that  one  could  not  be  saved 
unless  he  were  baptized.  Water-baptism  has  been 
counted  regenerative,  a  grace-conferring  ordinance,  a 
specific  antidote  to  the  malady  of  a  corrupt  nature 
inherited  from  Adam.  Such  is  the  doctrine  of  the 
Romish  Church,  the  Church  of  England,  and  some 
others.  But  the  spirit  of  the  Gospel  is  quite  opposed 
to  all  such  conclusions.  As  Paul  lightly  esteemed 
the  rite  of  circumcision,  so  he  never  suffered  baptism 
to  occupy  in  his  mind  an  important  place  as  part 
of  the  Christian  economy.  "  I  thank  God,"  he  says, 
"  I  baptized  none  of  you,  save "  —  as  many  as  he 
could  count  on  the  fingers  of  his  hand. 

6.  I  derive  support  to  the  doctrine  of  this  dis- 
course from  the  nature  of  things.  It  cannot  be,  I 
think,  that  the  application  of  water  to  the  body 
should  have  a  saving  efficacy  on  the  soul.  K  the 
blood  of  the  altar  could  not  cleanse  away  sin,  neither 
can  water  from  the  brook.  Sin  is  of  too  fast  a  color 
to  be  washed  out  by  such  a  process,  and  holiness  is 
of  too  spiritual  a  nature  to  be  generated  by  such  ap- 
pliances. 

It  is  in  the  light  of  such  considerations  as  I  have 
now  enumerated,  that  I  interpret  certain  expressions 
of  our  Saviour.  I  refer  to  the  commission  he  gave 
to  his  disciples,   "  Go,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 


8  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost "  ;  —  and  to  that  other  passage 
where  he  says,  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized 
shall  be  saved."  Did  our  Saviour,  by  these  expres- 
sions, positively  instruct  his  disciples  to  practise 
water-baptism,  and  condition  salvation  thereupon  ? 
Why,  then,  I  ask,  do  we  so  soon  find  St.  Paul 
thanking  God  that  he  had  baptized  none  ?  But 
more  ;  is  such  an  idea  consistent  with  other  undoubt- 
ed points  of  character  and  of  conduct  in  our  Saviour? 
Can  it  be  supposed  that  he  who  broke  through  all 
forms  would  have  made  everlasting  consequences  to 
depend  on  a  momentary  and  evanescent  application 
of  water  ?  If  water-baptism  were  essential,  why 
did  he  never  practise  it?  If  he  meant  that  his  dis- 
ciples should  immerse  or  sprinkle  all  nations,  why 
did  he  never  immerse  or  sprinkle  any  ?  But  what 
does  Christ  mean  when  he  uses  the  word  "  baptism  "  ? 
In  every  instance,  so  far  as  the  present  subject  is 
concerned,  where,  from  the  circumstances  of  the  case, 
his  language  is  determinable,  he  speaks  not  of  water- 
baptism,  but  of  something  very  different.  ^'  I  have 
a  baptism  to  be  baptized  with,  and  how  am  I  strait- 
ened till  it  be  accomplished."  "  With  the  baptism 
that  I  am  baptized  with,  ye  shall  be  baptized."  "  Ye 
shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  Surely, 
Christ's  use  of  the  word  Baptism  is  obvious  enough. 
And  when  he  says  to  his  disciples,  "  Go  ye,  there- 
fore, and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  (not  in 
water,  but)  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost "  ;  when  he  declares, 
"  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,"  — 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  9 

it  is  spiritual  baptism  that  he  means.  "  I  delegate 
you  to  carry  this  baptism  over  the  world.  Immerse 
mankind  in  the  divine  flood.  Pour  on  them  the 
waters  of  the  heavenly  Jordan." 

Thus  far  we  have  been  considering  the  meaning 
of  Gospel  baptism,  or  the  baptism  of  which  Christ 
speaks.  We  now  approach  the  subject  under  another 
aspect,  and  we  observe  that  while,  in  the  great  com- 
mission given  by  Christ  to  his  disciples  defining  the 
nature  of  their  future  labors,  the  idea  of  spiritual 
baptism  is  mainly  contemplated,  still  the  Apostles 
and  others,  after  the  death  of  Christ,  practised  water- 
baptism.  Of  this  there  can  be  no  question.  While 
we  are  positively  told  that  Christ  did  not  practise  it, 
and  Paul  but  rarely,  and  while  we  feel  assured  that 
the  great  Gospel  baptism  is  a  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  we  have  still  something  to  say  and  somewhat 
to  allow  concerning  water-baptism.  Christ  did  not 
condemn  it.  He  himself,  in  his  own  person,  received 
it.  Some  of  his  immediate  disciples  resorted  to  it. 
It  was  very  early  adopted  as  a  regulation  of  the 
Church.  True,  there  is  no  positive  command  for 
water-baptism ;  true,  also,  that  with  the  rite  many 
things  have  been  associated  that  disgust  a  liberal, 
and  shock  a  rational  mind  ;  but,  nevertheless,  I  think 
there  is  a  solid  and  a  reasonable  basis  for  it,  espe- 
cially as-  applicable  to  our  children. 

I  think  I  see  a  reason  for  the  practice  in  its  his- 
tory ;  and  yet,  there  are  few  customs  or  institutions 
the  origin  of  which  is  so  wTapped  in  obscurity  as 
this.  This  much,  however,  appears,  —  that  baptism, 
as  a  religious  rite,  has  been  observed  in  all  times,  and 


10  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

among  almost  all  nations.  It  existed  before  Christ ; 
it  was  anterior  to  Moses.  The  ancient  Egyptians, 
Greeks,  and  Romans  practised  it,  and  it  prevailed 
among  the  Mexicans  and  Peruvians.  John  the  Bap- 
tist did  not  originate  it,  for  it  was  in  extensive  use 
among  the  Jews  prior  to  his  day.  Baptism,  the  sa- 
cred use  of  water,  an  external  application  to  signify 
an  inward  purification,  would  seem  to  be  one  of  the 
natural  instincts  of  the  human  mind.  It  is  in  allu- 
sion to  this  universal  custom,  that  John  most  perti- 
nently says,  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water,"  but 
Jesus  comes,  who  will  baptize,  cleanse,  and  purify 
your  souls;  he  will  scatter  among  the  nations  that 
divine  truth  which,  as  a  flood  of  baptismal  water, 
shall  wash  their  sins  away.  It  was  in  accordance 
with  this  universal  custom,  that,  without  any  explicit 
declaration  on  the  subject  by  Christ,  it  was  universally 
introduced  into  the  early  Church,  and  has  continued 
as  a  part  of  the  ecclesiastical  ceremonial  to  this  day. 
Baptism,  or  the  ritual  use  of  water,  is  the  sign  of 
purification.  How  then,  it  may  be  asked,  does  it 
apply  to  children,  since  it  is  not  pretended  among  us 
that  they  are  defiled,  on  the  one  hand,  or  cleansed  by 
it  on  the  other  ?  Admitting  its  suitableness  for  one  of 
mature  years,  who  has  repented  of  his  sins,  or  who 
seeks  by  resolution  and  effort  for  illumination  and 
perfection,  still,  as  children  do  not  fulfil  these  con- 
ditions, what  is  its  significance  when  applied  to 
them  ?  I  answer.  Baptism  is  not,  indeed,  a  sign  of 
the  purification  of  children,  who  have  never  sinned ; 
it  is  a  sign  of  that  purity  into  ivhich  it  is  hoped  chil- 
dren may  grow.    It  is  a  sign  of  that  perpetual  purity 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  11 

which  ought  to  reign  over  the  heart  and  the  conduct 
of  childhood.  We  have  a  remote  antiquity  in  favor 
of  infant  baptism,  as  well  as  its  authority  for  much 
superstitious  practice.  As  I  have  already  said, 
water-baptism  has  been  counted  regenerative, — 
held  to  be  a  grace-conferring  ordinance.  Water  ap- 
plied in  baptism  was  thought  to  purge  the  stains  of 
the  Fall  and  to  insure  salvation.  In  Scotland,  a 
few  years  since,  unbaptized  children  were  supposed 
to  wander  in  woods  and  solitudes,  lamenting  their 
hard  fate,  like  the  souls  of  unburied  Greeks  on  the 
banks  of  the  Styx.  In  the  North  of  England  it 
was  deemed  unlucky  to  go  over  the  graves  of  the 
unbaptized.  But  all  these  things  we  wholly  discard. 
It  is  as  an  act  wherein  parents  consecrate  their  chil- 
dren to  God  and  the  Church,  as  a  pledge  wherein 
they  resolve  to  train  them  up  in  the  way  of  Christian 
obedience,  as  an  earnest  and  foreshadowing  of  that 
ultimate  and  greater  baptism  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  with  fire,  that  infant  baptism  has  its  chief  in- 
terest for  us.  Here,  as  I  conceive,  are  the  vital  bear- 
ings of  the  subject.  It  is  an  ordinance  whereby  the 
important  relations  and  duties  of  the  Church  are 
signified  and  recognized.  It  is  the  seal  of  the  cove- 
nant ivhich  the  Church  makes  with  its  children.  It 
expresses  the  interest  which  the  Church  has  for  the 
little  ones,  and  foretokens  the  protection  it  would  ex- 
tend over  them,  and  the  blessings  it  would  bestow 
upon  them. 

The  question  is  not,  then,  what  good  a  sprinkling 
of  water  will  do  the  children,  or  what  harm  will 
ensue  if  they  be  not  baptized  ;  it  is  rather  the  greater, 


12  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

the  more  momentous  question,  What  will  the  Church 
do  in  behalf  of  these  new  heirs  of  immortality,  these 
raw  empirics  in  human  experience?  It  matters  not 
how  young  a  child  may  be,  or  how  imbecile,  or  how 
unconscious ;  we  take  it,  helpless,  idealess,  sleeping 
it  may  be  in  its  mother's  arms,  and  baptize  it  into 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Such,  I  say,  is  what  the  Church  pro- 
poses to  do.  Such,  at  least,  is  my  idea  of  what  the 
Church  ought  to  do ;  such  is  the  standard  of  obliga- 
tion it  should  erect  for  itself.  It,  thus,  would  enter 
into  covenant  with  the  children  ;  it  would  cast  its 
wise  restraints  about  them;  it  would  shield  them 
with  its  most  maternal  love ;  it  would  guide  them 
to  their  eternal  rest.  The  Church  has  many  things 
to  deal  with,  many  concerns  to  look  after,  but  the 
gravest  of  its  cares  is  the  welfare  of  its  children. 

It  is  quite  as  well,  nay,  it  is  far  better,  that  one 
should  be  young  when  he  is  baptized.  Very  young 
children  do  not  understand  the  Sabbath,  its  nature 
or  its  uses,  and  yet  we  rejoice  to  have  them  feel  its 
sanctity,  and  be  subdued  by  its  repose.  So  in  re- 
spect of  many  things  we  do  for  them,  or  by  which 
we  would  affect  them,  they  are  unconscious  of  the 
significance  or  the  motive  of  our  conduct.  What- 
ever is  done  systematically  and  permanently  for  chil- 
dren usually  takes  its  start  below  their  consciousness, 
and  gradually  rises  to  it.  As  I  would  have  a  person 
young  when  he  begins  to  acquire  knowledge,  or 
when  he  commences  a  course  of  virtue,  so  I  would 
have  him  young  when  he  is  baptized ;  that  is,  I 
would  not  have  a  child  continue  in  ignorance,  nor 


CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM.  13 

addict  himself  to  vice,  before  in  these  respects  coun- 
teracting influences  should  be  gathered  about  him  ; 
nor  would  I  have  him  live  in  sin,  no,  not  for  an  hour, 
before  he  should  be  surrounded  by  the  salutary- 
forces  of  religion  and  brought  within  the  jurisdiction 
and  wardenship  of  the  Church. 

What  in  this  matter  have  we  cause  to  deplore  ? 
This :  that  the  mind  and  heart  and  strength  of  the 
Church  have  been  engrossed  with  an  outward,  mate- 
rial ceremony,  whereon  Scripture  delivers  itself  some- 
what ambiguously  ;  while  there  has  been  a  sad  for- 
getting and  neglect  of  the  inward,  spiritual  ceremony, 
whereon  the  letter  of  Scripture  is  so  precise  and 
authoritative.  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water,"  — 
we  read  so  far  and  stop.  We  crowd  about  John,  as 
if  he  had  uttered  words  on  which  hung  the  doom  of 
the  universe ;  we  ask  who,  what,  where,  when,  how? 
"  Shall  little  children  be  baptized  ?  "  "  No,"  cries  one 
party,  "  it  is  ludicrous,  it  is  absurd."  "  At  what  age, 
then  ?"  "  With  how  much  water  ?  "  "  By  dripping 
or  by  dipping? "  The  whole  Christian  world  is  con- 
vulsed. But  what  says  John?  I  baptize  with 
water,  indeed ;  let  it  pass  for  what  it  is  worth ;  but 
he,  my  superior,  he  into  whose  shadow  I  so  soon 
shall  fall,  he,  your  Saviour  and  Redeemer,  shall  bap- 
tize you  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire.  But  in 
spite  of  this,  we  follow  the  waning  disc  of  the  de- 
creasing John,  hunting  for  the  pools  of  Enon,  pry- 
ing along  the  reedy  banks  of  Jordan,  anxious,  prayer- 
ful, seeking  for  depth  of  water  wherein  to  lay  our 
bodies.  Christ,  the  increasing,  the  dilating  one,  who 
mounts  upward,  beckoning  us  on,  who  would  bap- 


14  CHRISTIAN    BAPTISM. 

tize  US  in   the  sun,  who   would   pour  on  us  floods 
of  empyrean  light,  him  we  forsake  and  despise! 

But  there  is  a  spiritual  baptism,  to  which  we  ought 
to  aspire.  "  Baptized  into  Christ."  "  Baptized  vnth 
the  Holy  Ghost."  This  is  peculiar  language.  The 
formula,  "  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  means  not  merely, 
christening  or  taking  upon  one's  self  the  Christian 
name  ;  it  signifies  this  higher  baptism.  We  are  bap- 
tized into  God,  as  we  are  into  Christ.  Not  merely  is 
the  name  of  God  a  portion  of  the  formula,  the  Spirit 
of  God  is  the  transfusing  element.  In  true  baptism, 
the  font  is  not  hewn  out  of  marble  or  fabricated  of 
silver.  Our  baptistery  is  the  universe  ;  the  baptismal 
flood  is  God,  and  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  We 
are  plunged  in  the  mighty  influences  of  truth.  It 
is  a  fiery  baptism,  —  one  that  melts  and  refines  us; 
one  that  sheds  warmth  and  vivacity  through  our  souls ; 
one  that  disperses  the  darkness  of  the  mind,  and 
gives  rest  and  peace  to  our  natures.  In  that  gor- 
geous lustre  and  radiance  which  burns  on  cloud- 
tops,  and  streams  along  the  sky  at  sunset,  I  baptize 
my  soul.  In  that  diviner  light,  in  the  beams  of  the 
Sun  of  Righteousness,  in  the  very  brightness  of  the 
Father's  glory,  I  baptize  my  soul.  Daily  as  the  sun 
baptizes  the  earth  with  light,  yearly  as  it  baptizes 
it  with  verdure,  so  ought  we  to  be  baptized  with  the 
beauty  of  the  Son  of  God.  Whatever  we  may 
think  about  water-baptism,  let  us  not  forget  the  bap- 
tism with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  fire.  Let  us  con- 
tinually strive  for  the  baptism  of  Christ,  even  as 
Paul  did  for  his  resurrection. 


SERMON    II. 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

CAST     TE     UP,     CAST    TE     UP,   PREPARE    THE   WAT,    TAKE    UP    THE 
STUMBLING-BLOCK     OUT    OF    THE   WAT   OF    MT   PEOPLE.  — Isaiall 

Ivii.  14. 

There  are  many  stumbling-blocks  in  the  way  of 
duty.  As  the  true  idea  of  the  soul,  of  Christianity 
and  the  Church,  begins  to  unfold,  these  stumbling- 
blocks  are  developed  more  and  more.  One  hin- 
derance  to  doings  what  we  ought  to  do  for  the  sacred 
interests  to  which  we  all  are  nominally  committed, 
lies  in  that  frequent  phrase,  "  I  am  not  a  professor." 
There  is  still  another,  which  lurks  in  the  feeling  or 
notion  that  one  has  not  been  converted.  There  are 
multitudes  who  will  not  do  any  thing  for  God  or 
the  Church,  on  the  ground  that  they  have  not  been 
converted.  Let  us  examine  what  this  ground  is, 
how  good  it  is,  how  substantial. 

Those  who  occupy  it  are  not  bad  men,  vile,  cor- 
rupt, impious.  I  take  it,  all  who  plead  this  excuse 
would  repel  such  an  imputation.  The  simple  idea 
at  the  bottom  is,  "  I  have  not  been  converted." 
What  is  this  being  converted  ?     What  is  the  force 


16  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

of  this  idea  ?  How  far  does  not  being  converted,  in 
the  sense  attached  to  that  word,  furnish  a  reasonable 
disqualification  for  duties  that  lie  before  us  ?  Is  not 
the  logic  of  the  phrase  chargeable  with  incoherency? 
If  a  man  who  has  neglected  duty  hitherto,  now  per- 
forms it,  is  he  not  a  converted  man  ?  Is  there  any 
sense  in  saying  you  will  do  your  duty  after  you  are 
converted  ?  Are  you  not  converted  in  the  very  act 
of  undertaking  to  do  your  duty,  or  in  passing  from 
a  state  of  indifference  to  one  of  interest  ? 

What  is  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  conversion  "  ? 
It  is  turning,  or  turning  round.  It  is  the  Latin  form 
of  the  Saxon  expression  to  turn.  It  signifies  to 
turn  from  one  state  or  condition  or  mode  to  another. 
The  con-esponding  Greek  word  means  this,  and  no 
more.  The  original  word  in  the  New  Testament  is 
translated,  indiscriminately,  to  turn,  and  to  be  con- 
verted. In  the  expression,  "the  dog  is  turned  to 
his  vomit  again, "  precisely  the  same  word  is  used 
(67naTp6(pa)^  arpefpco)  as  where  it  is  said,  "  When  thou 
art  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren,"  or  "  Let  your 
laughter  be  turned  (be  converted)  to  mourning." 
In  this  passage,  "  Jesus  turned  him  about  in  the  press, 
and  said.  Who  touched  my  clothes  ?  "  the  same  word 
is  used  as  where  we  read,  "  He  which  converteth  the 
sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way  shall  save  a  soul  from 
death."  Our  Lord  turned,  was  converted,  and  looked 
upon  Peter.  Throughout  them  all,  the  word  is  the 
same.  Paul  asks,  "  How  turn  ye  again  to  the  weak 
and  beggarly  elements  ? "  how  are  ye  converted  ? 
And  from  this  it  appears  we  may,  in  Bible  language, 
be  converted  or  turned  from  good  to  evil,  as  well  as 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  17 

from  evil  to  good.  Not  only  is  the  whole  man  spoken 
of,  in  the  New  Testament,  as  turning,  or  being  con- 
verted, but  parts  of  a  man  are  thus  spoken  of.  Paul 
speaks  of  some  who  turn  away,  convert,  their  ears 
from  the  truth.  Some  in  their  hearts  turned  back 
again,  were  converted,  unto  Egypt.  Again,  we  read 
that  Mary  turned  herself  back  and  saw  Jesus,  convert- 
ed herself.  Jesus  turned  himself  about,  was  convert- 
ed. "  If  the  house  be  worthy,  let  your  peace  come 
upon  it.  If  it  be  not  worthy,  let  it  return  to  you 
again."  Here  we  get  a  very  precise  idea  of  the  word. 
So  the  unclean  spirit  is  represented  as  saying,  "  I 
will  return  into  my  house  whence  I  came  out." 
"  Neither  let  him  which  is  in  the  field  return  hack  to 
take  his  clothes."  "  And  the  shepherds  returned^ 
glorifying  God."  "  Ye  were  as  sheep  going  astray, 
but  are  now  returned  [converted]  unto  the  Shepherd 
and  Bishop  of  your  souls." 

Again,  this  verb  is  almost  always  active  in  the 
original,  where  it  is  passive  in  the  translation.  This 
people  have  closed  their  eyes,  "  lest  at  any  time  they 
should  see  with  their  eyes,  and  should  be  converted" 
( eTrtcrr/De-v/rcoo-f,),  literally,  should  turn,  or  return,  "  and 
I  should  heal  them."  "  If  thy  brother  trespass  against 
thee  seven  times  a  day,  and  seven  times  a  day  turn 
again  to  thee  [be  converted  to  thee],  thou  shalt  forgive 
him."  "  Repent  ye,  therefore,  and  he  converted^^^ 
return,  turn,  or  convert  yourselves.  Indeed,  I  do 
not  recall  an  instance  where  the  verb  in  the  original 
has  the  passive  form.  But  the  translation  sometimes 
gives  the  word  in  the  active  sense  of  the  original. 
Thus  :     "  Many  of  the  children   of  Israel    shall  he 

2* 


18  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

[John]  turn  [convert]  to  the  Lord  their  God,  and  he 
shall  go  before  him  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Elias 
to  turn  [convert]  the  hearts  of  the  fathers  to  the 
children,"  &c.  "  And  all  that  dwelt  in  Lydda  saw 
Eneas,  whom  Peter  had  healed,  and  turned  unto  the 
Lord."  "  And  a  great  number  believed,  and  turned 
unto  the  Lord."  Paul  says :  "  We  are  men  of 
like  passions  with  you,  and  preach  unto  you  that  ye 
should  turn  [be  converted]  from  these  vanities  unto 
the  living  God."  It  is  possible,  according  to  the 
word  of  God,  for  one  man  to  convert  another.  The 
commission  to  Paul  was  in  these  words :  "  I  send 
thee  to  open  the  eyes  of  the  people,  and  to  turn 
[convert]  them  from  darkness  to  light."  "  Brethren," 
says  St.  James,  "  if  any  of  you  do  err  from  the  truth, 
and  one  convert  him,  let  him  know  that  he  which 
converteth  the  sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way  shall 
save  a  soul  from  death,  and  shall  hide  a  multitude 
of  sins." 

This  is  the  way  the  matter  stands  in  the  Bible.  And 
now,  in  the  light  of  divine  truth,  I  ask  again,  "What 
is  the  meaning  of  the  pretence  that  a  man  cannot  do 
his  duty  to  God,  to  his  own  soul,  and  the  Church, 
until  he  is  converted?  Men  are  sometimes  likened 
to  sheep  going  astray.  What  language  shall  we  use 
to  them  ?  What  shall  they  reply  to  us  ?  Suppose 
we  say,  "  You  ought  to  be  in  the  fold,  you  ought  to 
go  back  to  your  Shepherd,"  shall  they  reply,  "  We 
know  it,  but  we  cannot  do  so  until  we  are  convert- 
ed "  ?  What  is  going  back  but  conversion  ?  Sup- 
pose we  say,  "  Instead  of  continuing  to  go  on  in  this 
way,  you  ought  to  turn  back  and  go  home."   If  they, 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  19 

owing  to  some  deep,  inveterate  prejudice,  fail  to  per- 
ceive the  equivoque  in  the  vi^ords,  "  We  cannot  turn 
back  until  we  are  converted,"  we  should  have  to  ex- 
plain to  them  that  these  two  ideas  are  identical.  As 
the  Apostle  says,  "  Ye  were  as  sheep  going  astray, 
but  are  now  returned  [converted]  unto  the  Shepherd 
and  Bishop  of  your  souls." 

The  allusion,  the  import,  and  application  of  the 
language  in  the  Bible  are  exceedingly  simple.  You 
are  turned  from  an  object,  you  turn  towards  it  and 
are  converted  ;  as  Christ  turned  (literally,  converted 
himself),  and  looked  towards  Peter.  You  are  going 
a  wrong  way,  you  turn  and  go  a  right  way ;  you  are 
converted  ;  as  the  sinner  is  converted  who  is  turned 
from  the  error  of  his  way.  You  have  neglected 
your  affairs,  you  now  attend  to  them  ;  you  are  con- 
verted. You  have  been  indifferent  to  truth,  you  be- 
come interested  in  it ;  you  are  converted. 

Summarily,  conversion,  according  to  Bible  lan- 
guage, is  doing  the  very  thing  which  you  say  you 
must  be  converted  before  you  can  do.  Conversion 
does  not  lie  anywhere  between  a  man  and  his  duty. 
Whoever  faithfully  fulfils  his  duty,  having  once  neg- 
lected it,  is  a  converted  man.  "  Conversion  "  does 
not  express  what  a  man  is,  or  what  happens  to  him, 
but  what  he  does.  Invariably,  I  believe,  it  is  re- 
ferred to  by  the  sacred  writers  in  an  active  sense. 

Suppose  now,  to  begin  at  the  very  quick  of  relig- 
ion, you  do  not  love  God,  your  heart  is  estranged, 
you  are  carnally-minded,  you  are  the  servant  of  sin  ; 
how  does  the  Bible  and  common  sense  address  you 
in  such  a  case  ?     It  urges  you  to  love  God ;  it  ad- 


20  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

monishes  you  of  your  serious  duty.  Do  you  say, 
you  would  love  God,  and  be  a  disciple  of  Christ,  if 
you  were  only  converted  ?  The  very  act  of  loving 
God,  the  very  first  recognition  of  Jesus  as  your  Lord 
and  Master,  is  conversion  ;  it  is  the  essence  and  ful- 
filment of  that  very  thing.  If  you  do  not  love  God, 
and  presently  begin  to  love  him,  that  is  conyersion, 
it  is  turning  your  heart  to  him ;  it  is  obedience  to 
the  exhortation,  "  Turn  ye,  turn  ye,  for  why  will  ye 
die  ?"  If  you  have  been  sceptical,  faithless,  heartless, 
cold,  in  regard  to  Christ  and  the  Church,  and  hence- 
forth become  a  believer,  a  lover,  and  a  doer  in  these 
regards,  that  again  is  conversion,  you  become  a  con- 
vert. Multitudes  think  or  feel  that  they  cannot  pray, 
or  it  is  no  duty  of  theirs  to  pray,  or  it  is  not  expected 
of  them  to  pray,  till  they  have  been  converted.  The 
fact  is,  if  you  have  hitherto  neglected  prayer,  turned 
your  back  upon  it,  and  now  turn  round,  if  you  now 
begin  to  pray,  you  thereby  become  converted. 

There  is  no  mystery  in  conversion,  so  far  as  the 
Gospel  is  concerned.  It  is  a  matter  of  common 
sense,  of  every-day  life,  of  familiar  experience.  Christ 
and  the  Apostles  employ  the  word  in  all  manner  of 
connections,  and  for  all  sorts  of  purposes,  and  with 
the  utmost  freedom.  It  is,  as  you  see,  a  common 
word  in  the  Bible,  just  as  much  so  as  turning,  or 
going,  or  looking,  or  moving.  There  is  no  theo- 
logical, occult,  polemic  word  Conversion  in  the 
Bible.  It  is  used  indiscriminately  of  one  who 
turns  from  duty,  and  of  one  who  turns  to  it.  It  has 
just  as  many  uses  as  the  word  turn  has,  physical, 
moral,  secular,  religious.     There  is  just  this  differ- 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  21 

ence;  the  verb  "to  turn"  is  active-transitive  and 
active-intransitive,  as  when  we  say,  "  a  man  turns  to 
go  home,"  or  "  a  man  turns  a  wheel"  ;  whereas  the 
verb  "convert"  is  used  only  in  an  active-transitive 
sense,  as  thus  :  "  a  man  converts  ice  into  water."  We 
do  not  say,  a  drunkard  converts  to  temperance,  but 
are  obliged  to  employ  the  passive  form  of  the  verb, 
and  say,  a  drunkard  is  converted  to  temperance.  But 
the  Greek  verb,  iTrco-rpecj^co,  is  employed,  just  like  our 
verb  to  turn,  in  an  active-transitive  and  in  an  ac- 
tive-intransitive sense.  Yet  in  rendering  this  word 
"convert"  instead  of  "turn,"  the  translators  resorted 
to  a  less  flexible  word,  and  one  that  without  an  ob- 
ject must  always  be  used  in  the  passive  voice.  So 
they  represent  Peter  as  saying,  "  Repent  and  be  con- 
verted," and  Christ  as  saying,  "  Except  ye  be  con- 
verted," while  in  reality  the  former  says,  "  Repent  and 
return,"  and  Christ  says,  "  Except  ye  return." 

Out  of  this  grammatical  peculiarity  has  the  mis- 
take, in  part,  arisen,  under  which  the  subject  labors  ; 
and  this  contributes  likewise  to  uphold  the  dogmatic 
error  that  man  is  passive  in  conversion.  It  is 
preached  everywhere,  in  elaborate  churches,  in  ves- 
try-rooms, in  school-houses,  in  camp-meetings,  that 
men  must  be  converted.  I  affirm  that  that  is  not 
what  the  Bible  teaches.  The  language  and  doctrine 
of  the  Bible  are,  that  man  must  return,  or  turn  about. 
On  this  difference  of  phraseology  depend  most  sin- 
gular results.  The  two  words  have  very  different 
meanings,  and  theologically  speaking  this  difference 
is  of  a  rather  formidable  nature.  What  is  sin  ? 
What  is  man  ?     What  is  religion  ?     What  is  to  be 


22  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

looked  for  in  the  matter  of  salvation?  These  and 
similar  questions  are  involved  in  this  discussion  of 
a  word.  Is  sin,  as  the  English  Church  maintains, 
the  corruption  of  our  nature,  naturally  engendered 
from  Adam  ?  Or  is  it,  as  the  Bible  says,  a  trans- 
gression of  the  Divine  law  ?  If  the  former,  then  con- 
version is  a  passive  state,  a  supernatural  effect ;  a 
man  is  converted,  he  does  not  return.  If  the  latter, 
then  conversion  consists  in  obedience  to  the  law,  it 
is  ceasing  to  do  evil  and  learning  to  do  well.  Is  sin 
an  act,  or  is  it  a  mode  of  our  natures  ?  Is  it  volun- 
tary or  involuntary  ?  Is  man  as  a  sinner  responsible 
or  irresponsible  ?  Does  a  man  sin  in  Adam,  or  in 
himself?  We  do  not  hesitate  on  these  questions,  we 
have  no  doubts  whatever  on  the  subject.  God  has 
revealed  the  truth  to  his  own  Church.  Most  strik- 
ingly, most  wonderfully,  most  providentially  I  might 
say,  does  the  examination  of  Scripture  serve  to  con- 
firm all  the  fundamental  views  of  the  Church.  The 
deeper  we  pursue  the  inquiry,  the  more  light  from 
the  great  central  luminary  is  derived  to  our  foregone 
conclusions.  The  moment  we  leave  the  pathway 
of  creeds  and  formulas  of  human  device,  and  come 
where  God  himself  speaks  to  the  children  of  men, 
then  do  we  discover  what  the  essential  truth  is. 

No ;  conversion  is  a  returning,  mark  the  word,  a 
returning',  a  going  back  to  something  we  have  left,  a 
recovery  of  an  old  position,  a  resumption  of  what  we 
have  neglected.  Jesus  says,  "  Except  ye  be  convert- 
ed," —  that  is,  except  ye  return,  turn  about,  go  back, 
—  "  and  become  as  little  children,  ye  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."     The  child's  nature  is  not  corrupt. 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  23 

it  is  not  a  vicious  condition  of  being  engendered  of 
Adam ;  it  is  pure ;  it  is  free,  I  mean,  from  the  stain 
of  sin;  and  we  must  return  to  that  simplicity  and 
innocence,^that  our  souls  may  be  saved.  This  is 
what  Christ  teaches.  This  is  what  we  believe. 
This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Church. 

Conversion,  then,  in  its  highest  sense,  is  the  return- 
ing of  the  soul  to  its  God,  of  the  child  to  its  Father 
in  heaven,  of  the  wanderer  to  his  home.  Repent 
and  be  converted  ;  repent  and  return.  By  repent- 
ance and  humiliation,  every  sinner  can  and  must  re- 
turn to  his  God. 

All  this,  you  say,  is  obvious  and  satisfactory. 
What  is  the  difficulty  ?  This  is  it ;  that,  as  regards 
many  of  us,  the  effect  of  our  early  education  cleaves 
to  us,  the  errors  with  which  the  very  atmosphere 
round  about  is  saturated  influence  us,  the  popular 
prejudices  on  the  subject  are  imbibed  by  us,  and 
when  a  man  is  spoken  to  about  his  duty  to  God,  his 
own  soul,  and  the  Church,  instantly  a  feeling  arises 
which  says,  "  Why,  I  have  never  been  converted ! " 
or,  "  If  I  had  been  converted,  you  might  expect  such 
and  such  things  of  me."  The  effect  is  like  poison 
taken  into  the  system,  and  a  long  time  will  be  neces- 
sary to  purge  it  away.  This  prejudice,  or  sentiment, 
whatever  it  be  called,  is  sometimes  hallowed  by  the 
memory  of  parents  who  believed  very  differently  from 
what  we  can  believe ;  it  is  associated,  perhaps,  with 
some  of  the  tenderest  and  most  solemn  recollections 
of  our  life.  Sometimes,  when  it  has  been  hammered 
into  us  by  some  pow^erful  sermon  we  may  have 
heard,  it  has  become  like   a  goad  fastened  by  the 


24  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

master  of  assemblies.  Our  nerves,  or  our  strength, 
are  not  sufficient  to  rise  to  the  simple  Gospel  point 
of  elevation,  where  we  can  see  that  conversion  is 
doing  the  will  of  God. 

There  is  another  matter  in  this  connection  w^iich 
occasions  difficulty, —  a  dread  of  what  the  world  will 
say.  If  one  of  you  should  undertake  a  religious  duty, 
the  question  would  be  asked,  "  When  w^as  he  con- 
verted?" Or  perhaps  the  w^hisper  would  go  round, 
"  I  never  heard  he  had  met  with  a  change!"  Or, 
"  Do  they  allow  unconverted  people  to  engage  in 
religious  duties  ? "  The  fear  of  man  bringeth  a 
snare,  and  the  dread  which  I  speak  of  fetters  many 
a  foot,  and  smothers  many  an  utterance. 

Again,  there  are  those  who  contrive  to  comfort 
themselves  with  the  idea,  that,  as  they  never  have 
been  converted,  nothing  is  expected  of  them,  and 
who  hope  to  live  along  without  reproach  from  others 
or  remorse  in  their  own  souls.  While  you  really  be- 
lieve one  thing,  you  practise  another.  Your  rational, 
sober  belief  is,  that  conversion  is  doing  your  duty  ; 
your  practice  proceeds  on  the  principle,  that  you  can- 
not do  your  duty  until  you  are  converted.  This  idea 
of  conversion  that  is  so  prevalent,  that  is  even  lodged 
in  your  own  feelings,  is  not  a  Gospel  idea,  but  a 
Calvinistic  figment.  And  let  me  say,  you  never  can 
be  Calvinistically  converted,  for  the  reason  that  you 
do  not  believe  in  Calvinism.  You  practise  Calvin- 
ism every  day  ;•  I  mean,  you  proceed  on  the  idea 
that  nothing  in  a  religious  way  is  to  be  expected  of 
you  until  you  have  been  converted.  But  that  sort 
of  conversion  the  men  and  women  here  to-day  will 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  25 

never  reach,  go  where  you  will,  and  hear  whatever 
preaching  you  may,  for  the  reason  that  in  your  own 
minds  you  do  not,  and  never  can  be  made  to  accept 
the  dogma  on  which  it  rests.  No,  you  will  go  on 
just  as  you  are  now  going,  through  life,  from  this  to 
your  dying  day,  with  the  light  of  evangelical  truth 
shining  full  upon  you,  but  with  your  feet  at  the 
same  time  cumbered  with  the  miry  clay  of  error  and 
prejudice,  unless  by  some  immediate,  vigorous,  and 
as  it  were,  revolutionary  decision,  you  break  the  spell 
that  binds  you. 

I  remark,  as  regards  multitudes  of  young  men  and 
women,  and  older  men  and  women,  in  the  sects  about 
us,  and  all  over  the  State,  that  they  are  waiting  for 
this  supernatural  conversion  ;  they  are  waiting  for  it, 
they  are  doing  nothing  themselves,  they  have  no  en- 
joyment of  God,  they  have  no  assurance  of  hope, 
they  enter  upon  no  religious  duties,  they  accept  no 
responsibilities  as  immortal  beings.  Religiously 
speaking,  they  are  wasting,  dissipating,  losing  the 
best  portion  of  their  lives,  and  all  because  the  time 
of  their  fancied  conversion  has  not  yet  arrived. 
Some  of  them  live  in  sin,  commit  all  sorts  of  vice, 
under  the  vain  notion  that  this  something  called 
conversion,  in  a  revival  or  at  some  other  juncture, 
will  suparvene,  and  then  they  will  not  want  to  sin, 
then  they  will  come  into  the  Church,  leave  off  bad 
habits,  and  enjoy  a  pure  life. 

Such  a  conversion  as  they  dream  of  may  possibly 
happen  to  them  ;  but,  as  I  have  had  occasion  to  re- 
mark, the  instances  are  becoming  fewer  and  fewer  all 
through  the  country.     And  what,  erelong,  must  the 


26  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

issue  be  ?  That  there  will  be  no  religion  at  all  ? 
Assuredly  Calvinism  is  losing  its  force  upon  the 
public  mind  ;  certainly  Calvinistic  conversions  are 
diminishing.  When  there  shall  be  no  such  conver- 
sions, what  then  ?  What,  I  ask,  will  become  of  our 
young  men  and  women,  and  our  older  men  and 
women  ? 

My  reply  is,  that  the  platform  of  the  simple  Gos- 
pel is  broad  enough  to' receive  them  all,  and  strong 
enough  to  hold  them  all.  They  will  yet  find,  as  I 
hope  and  pray,  that  being  converted,  in  the  Gospel 
sense,  is  radically  and  simply  a  turning^  unto  God, 
The  Church,  the  true  Church,  the  Church  that  has 
the  seven  golden  candlesticks  blazing  with  light, 
must  develop  itself,  extend  itself,  lengthen  its  cords, 
and  strengthen  its  stakes,  that  it  may  receive  into  its 
bosom  and  enfold  the  multitudes  of  the  bewrayed, 
the  estray,  the  forlorn  and  lost,  who  may  flee  from 
error,  cant,  and  formality,  and  desire  a  shelter. 

The  two  notions  of  the  innate  corruption  of  hu- 
man nature  and  of  miraculous  conversion  are  actu- 
ally consuming  the  religion  of  New  England ;  I 
mean,  they  are  filling  our  cities  and  towns,  our 
churches  and  families,  with  those  who  believe  they 
have  nothing  to  do  with  religion  or  the  Church  except 
in  that  mysterious  contingency  to  which  I  have  ad- 
verted. God  gives  it  to  us,  my  friends,  —  reverently 
and  without  presumption,  yet  positively,  I  say  it,  — 
God  gives  it  to  us  to  rescue  and  preserve  the  religion 
of  our  country.  The  Churcli,  God's  own  Church, 
that  which  is  the  pillar  and  stay  of  the  truth,  that 
which  invokes  reason  and  common  sense,  (without 


GOSPEL    CONVERSION.  27 

which  religion  cannot  stand  up  long  anywhere,) 
which  allies  itself  to  humanity  and  cleaves  to  the 
simple  word  of  God, — in  a  word,  the  true  Church) 
is  our  refuge  and  our  hope. 

My  friends,  let  us  listen  to  the  message  God  ad- 
dresses to  us.  "  Cast  ye  up,  cast  ye  up,  prepare  the 
way,  take  up  the  stumbling-block  out  of  the  way  of 
my  people."  The  stumbling-blocks  in  the  way  of 
truth  are  obviously  such  as  error  puts  there  ;  the 
stumbling-blocks  in  the  way  of  our  individual  prog- 
ress in  truth  are  such  as  a  false  education  has  placed 
in  our  way.  One  of  these  obstacles  is  that  which  I 
have  now  commented  upon,  that  one  cannot  do  his 
duty  until  he  is  converted.  Let  us,  my  friends,  re- 
move it  out  of  the  way.  "  Not  being  converted  " 
really  exempts  you  from  no  duty,  discharges  you 
from  no  obligation,  gives  you  quittance  from  no  com- 
mandment ;  no,  not  for  an  hour.  If  you  are  a  sinner 
before  God,  your  duty  is  to  leave  off  your  sins  and 
•turn  to  or  be  converted  unto  God.  If  you  do  not 
pray,  your  duty  is  to  pray.  No  plea  of  non-conver- 
sion can  excuse  you  for  an  instant.  If  your  child 
runs  into  the  street,  and  you  send  for  him  to  come 
back,  does  it  content  you  that  he  replies,  "  When  I 
am  converted,  I  will  go  back  "  ?  You  send  him  to 
school,  and  ^^e  plays  truant,  and  wanders  down  to 
the  river.  When  one  speaks  to  him,  and  urges  him 
to  return  to  school,  shall  he  take  refuge  in  the  same 
preposterous  reply  ?  And  yet  that  reply  is  no  whit 
less  absurd  in  respect  of  religious  duties  than  it  is  in 
the  cases  just  supposed. 

Nor  do  we  misconceive  conversion,  we  understand 


28  GOSPEL    CONVERSION. 

it ;  nor  do  we  pervert  its  meaning,  we  elucidate  it ; 
or  rather,  by  applying  ourselves  to  the  simple  word 
of  God,  we  discover  and  learn  what  it  is.  This  ex- 
plains what  I  have  elsewhere  said  about  Unitarian- 
ism  being  the  true  interpreter  of  the  Bible.  It  gets 
just  as  near  to  the  mind  of  Christ  as  it  is  possible  to 
do.  It  goes  to  the  original  media  of  expression  ;  it 
compares  passage  with  passage  ;  it  follows  a  given 
word  from  book  to  book.  Having  heard  Christ  use 
a  phrase  once,  it  stays  near  him  and  waits  until  he 
uses  it  again,  and  then  it  betakes  itself  to  Paul,  to  be 
sure  of  the  sense  ;  and  thus,  simply,  humbly  loving 
the  truth,  it  is  impossible  that  it  should  not  know  the 
truth. 

My  friends,  to  use  no  harsher  epithet,  it  is  a  shame 
that  rational,  immortal  beings,  men  and  women  with 
religious  natures,  a  religious  sense,  religious  needs, 
should  be  embarrassed  in  the  discharge  of  their  du- 
ties, hindered  from  the  accomplishment  of  their  des- 
tiny, spoiled  of  their  highest  happiness,  by  these 
pitiful  pretexts.  Let  us  feel,  let  each  man,  woman, 
and  child  feel,  that  we  have  something  to  do  for  God, 
our  own  souls,  and  the  Church.  Let  us  be  ready  to 
do  that  something  to-day,  or  any  day,  as  opportunity 
offers,  or  call  upon  us  shall  be  made.  Let  us  remem- 
ber that  conversion  consists  in  doing  our  duty  ;  that 
we  are  being  converted  just  as  far  and  as  fast  as  we 
do  our  duty ;  that  there  is  no  conversion,  and  never 
can  be  a  genuine  conversion,  while  a  man  neglects 
to  do  his  duty. 


SERMON    III 


CHRISTIAN  OBLIGATIONS  UNIVERSAL. 

FOR  THE  KINGDOM  OF  HEAVEN  IS  AS  A  MAN  TRAVELLING  INTO  A 
FAR  COUNTRY,  WHO  CALLED  HIS  OWN  SERVANTS,  AND  DELIV- 
ERED UNTO  THEM  HIS  GOODS.  AND  UNTO  ONE  HE  GAVE  FIVE 
TALENTS,  TO  ANOTHER  TWO,  AND  TO  ANOTHER  ONE  ;  TO  EVERY 
MAN  ACCORDING  TO  HIS  SEVERAL  ABILITY  J  AND  STRAIGHT- 
WAY TOOK  HIS  JOURNEY. — Matt.  XXV.  14,  15. 

I  MIGHT  refer  for  my  text  to  the  entire  passage 
which  I  read  to  you  this  morning.  In  it  are  con- 
tained the  thoughts  on  which  I  propose  to  dwell, 
and  the  doctrine  I  would  inculcate. 

In  the  parable  it  is  stated  that  the  servants  were 
held  responsible,  each  according  to  his  abihty.  The 
word  "  talent,"  which  in  the  original  means  a  sum  of 
money,  may  be  considered,  in  its  spiritual  applica- 
tion, to  denote  in  general  terms  our  duties  ;  and  it  is 
a  principle  at  once  of  Christ  and  of  common  sense, 
that  duty  devolves  to  every  man  according  to  his 
ability.  It  is  sometimes  common  to  regard  talents 
in  the  light  of  powers,  gifts,  endowments  ;  that  is, 
means  of  performing  our  duty.  But  this  seems  to 
confound  them  a  little  with  the  ability  or  capacity 
according  to  which  they  are  distributed.  Perhaps 
both   ideas    are  to  some  extent  involved  ;  and  the 


30  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

term  may  stand  for  faculties  to  be  improved,  as  well 
as  duties  to  be  fulfilled.  The  language  of  the  text 
is,  "  The  Lord  called  his  own  servants,  and  delivered 
unto  them  his  goods ;  and  he  gave  to  every  man  ac- 
cording to  his  several  ability."  The  ability  was  the 
basis,  the  measure  of  the  trust.  The  ability  in  each 
case  determined  the  ratio  of  his  bounty  ;  the  bounty 
was  not  arbitrarily  bestowed,  and  then  regarded  as  a 
criterion  of  ability.  No  man  is  accountable  for  what 
he  cannot  do.  No  man  is  accountable  beyond  the 
strict  limit  of  his  ability.  The  doctrine  of  the  pas- 
sage is,  to  be  a  little  more  specific,  that  every  man  is 
responsible  to  God  and  to  his  own  soul ;  that  relig- 
ious, moral,  and  other  duties  devolve  to  every  man, 
according  to  his  several  ability. 

The  passage  reads,  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  as 
a  man,"  &c.  These  words  in  italics  are  not  in  the 
original,  but  are  supplied.  Better,  perhaps,  say.  The 
So7i  of  Man  is  as  a  man  travelling  into  a  far  coun- 
try, &c.  This  would  be  more  appropriate,  I  think. 
Christ,  so  to  say,  has  gone  on  a  journey.  He  leaves 
his  goods,  his  effects,  his  interests,  his  schemes  and 
purposes,  in  the  hands  of  his  servants.  He  delivers 
to  us  duties,  work,  commands,  according  to  our  sev- 
eral ability ;  to  one  ten  talents,  to  another  five,  to 
another  one  ;  to  all,  something.  If  we  are  right  in 
supposing  that  the  parable  refers  to  men  generally, 
our  statement  broadens  into  this,  that  Christian  du- 
ties devolve  to  every  man,  according  to  his  ability. 
Let  us  look  at  this  determining  test,  the  hinge  on 
which  our  duty  is  made  to  turn,  this  ability. 

Ability  may  be  considered  as  made  up  of  three 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 


31 


parts,  or  resolvable  into  three  elements,  intelligence, 
capacity,  and  opportunity.  Perhaps  more  things 
may  enter  into  its  composition,  but  these  three  are 
certain  and  enough.  There  must  be  intelligence,  or 
the  knowledge  of  what  duty  is;  capacity,  or  the 
power  of  performing  it ;  and  opportunity,  or  the  oc- 
casion and  call  for  it.  If  one  have  these  three  in 
combination,  he  w^ould  seem  to  be  sufficiently  fur- 
nished unto  all  good  works,  unto  all  that  God  or 
man  can  demand  of  him.  Our  formula,  then,  may 
be  thus  expressed :  man  is  responsible  according  to 
his  intelligence,  capacity,  and  opportunity.  Consid- 
ered as  moral  and  religious  beings,  our  moral  and 
religious  duties  are  as  our  intelligence,  capacity,  and 
opportunity ;  as  under  the  Christian  dispensation, 
our  Christian  obligations  are  in  the  same  ratio. 

Reflect  on  what  is  here  involved.  Our  responsi- 
bility and  duties  before  God  are  not  proportioned 
according  to  any  arbitrary  judgment  of  our  fellow- 
men,  or  any  conventional  standards  of  society.  They 
do  not  devolve  to  wealth  alone ;  the  poor  man  has 
high  obligations  as  well  as  the  rich.  They  are  not 
laid  upon  mental  force  alone  ;  the  man  of  mediocre 
mind  is  equally  accountable  with  the  man  of  gigantic 
intellect.  Only  some  have  ten  talents  to  deal  with, 
and  others  but  one.  Again,  our  duties  are  not  deter- 
mined merely  by  the  intelHgence  we  posses's,  but  also 
by  our  capacity.  Nor  are  these  alone  to  be  consid- 
ered; thereto  must  be  added  opportunity.  A  man 
may  clearly  see  that  certain  things  ought  to  be  done, 
and  yet  have  no  power  to  do  them.  Or,  the  under- 
standing and  the  power  may  entirely  fail  of  results, 
by  reason  of  a  want  of  occasion  or  call. 


32  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

Especially  I  would  observe,  that  our  moral  and 
religious  accountableness  is  not  graduated  by  pro- 
fession. The  Lord,  in  the  parable,  divided  what 
may  be  called  his  capital  among  his  servants,  not  ac- 
cording to  the  professions  any  of  them  made,  but 
unto  every  man  according  to  his  several  ability.  So 
are  we  all  accountable  before  God.  So  are  moral 
and  religious  duties,  so  are  Christian  obligations 
apportioned  amongst  us,  to  every  man,  woman,  and 
child,  according  to  our  several  ability.  Such  I  un- 
derstand to  be,  such  I  insist  is,  the  rule  of  Christian- 
ity and  of  common  sense.  Let  us  apply  it,  —  apply 
it  to  ourselves  and  to  the  community  about  us. 

A  difficulty  appears  at  once.  The  general  senti- 
ment and  practice  have  transferred  and  confined  the 
obligation  of  religious  duties  to  a  limited  portion 
of  the  population.  In  other  words,  the  world  about 
us  is  divided  into  two  classes,  one  of  which  assumes, 
while  the  other  deems  itself  exempt  from,  the  high- 
est duties  of  human  existence.  The  former  is  a 
small  company,  the  latter  comprises  the  great  body 
of  our  citizens.  Herein  is  a  singular  condition  of 
things.  Let  us  examine  it  for  a  moment.  That 
which  characterizes  these  two  classes  is,  for  the  most 
part,  what  is  popularly  known  as  profession  of  re- 
ligion and  non-profession.  Or,  the  first  are  techni- 
cally church-members,  and  the  last  are  non-church- 
members.  The  sentiment  or  notion  to  which  I  refer 
is,  that  the  highest  human  obligations  before  God, 
religious  duties.  Christian  accountability,  devolve 
solely  to  the  comparatively  small  fraction  of  the 
community  called  professors  of  religion.     I  observe, 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  33 

moreover,  that  this  is  an  ecclesiastical  novelty,  a 
notion  somewhat  peculiar  to  New  England.  The 
origin  of  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  dogma  that  all  men, 
by  nature,  are  totally  depraved,  but  that  in  a  few 
men  this  depravity  is  in  some  supernatural  way 
cured.  Hence  the  people  of  any  given  locality  be- 
come separated  into  two  classes,  the  naturally  irre- 
ligious and  the  supernaturally  regenerate.  Those 
whose  innate  depravity  has  been  cured  make  a  pro- 
fession of  the  fact,  or  of  their  hope  of  the  fact; 
thence  the  distinction  of  professors  and  non-profes- 
sors. Thus  sprung  up  this  sweeping  characteriza- 
tion of- the  human  race.  In  its  peculiar  features,  and 
such  as  we  ourselves  have  been  familiar  with,  the 
system  is  about  a  century  old.  It  is  sometimes  said 
to  be  of  no  consequence  what  a  man's  speculative 
notions  are.  But  this  purely  inetaphysical  abstrac- 
tion of  total  depravity  lies  at  the  very  bottom  of  the 
sentiment  and  usage  to  which  I  have  adverted. 

You  all  know  how  the  case  stands.  Go  back  in 
memory  to  the  village  where  you  were  brought  up. 
There  were  the  professors  and  the  non-professors; 
in  other  words,  "  the  Church,"  so  called,  and  the 
world.  The  professors  were  supposed  to  be  in  the 
sight  of  God  the  good  people,  and  the  others  the 
bad.  The  professors  had  hopes,  the  others  had  none. 
Call  to  mind  the  universal,  deep-seated,  positive 
popular  expectation  and  feeling  that  these  profes- 
sors alone  should  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  that 
they  alone  should  have  their  children  baptized,  that 
they  only  should  pray  in  their  families  and  in  private, 
that  they  should  attend  and  generally  speak  and  pray 


34  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

in  religious  meetings,  that  if  any  one  would  study  for 
the  ministry,  or  go  forth  as  a  missionary,  or  become 
a  deacon,  or  undertake  any  religious  office,  he  must 
be  a  professor;  and,  negatively,  that  these  men  must 
not  use  profane  language  or  dance.  Nay,  more- 
Was  it  not  in  your  younger  days,  is  it  not  now 
everywhere  hereabout,  the  expectation,  feeling,  senti- 
ment, deep  and  irresistible,  that  those  others,  the 
non-professors,  would  not  partake  of  the  Sacrament, 
or  have  their  children  baptized,  or  pray  in  their 
families  or  in  an  evening  meeting;  that  no  one  of 
them  would  for  a  moment  think  of  filling  the  office 
of  a  deacon,  or  of  studying  for  the  ministry,  or  of 
embarking  on  missionary  labors?  I  do  not  mean 
that  a  non-professor  was  positively  enjoined  not  to 
pray,  but  would  it  not  have  been  thought  passing 
strange  if  the  mass  of  the  people,  the  non-professors 
in  your  native  town,  had  adopted  regular  habits  of 
family  prayer?  But  as  for  certain  kinds  of  recrea- 
tion, you  know  these  were,  for  the  most  part,  abso- 
lutely interdicted  to  professors,  or  at  least  were  re- 
garded as  matters  of  reproach  and  discipline  when 
indulged  in  by  professors,  while  for  a  non-professor 
to  practise  them  was  thought  nothing  of. 

Will  it  be  said  that  this  distinction  of  professor 
and  non-professor  implied  a  real  difference  in  char- 
acter, in  heart  and  life ;  that  the  first  was  truly  a 
saint  and  the  last  a  notable  sinner,  the  first  really  a 
good  man  and  the  last  really  a  bad  man  ?  Is  that 
the  fact  ?  Are  New  England  professors  of  religion 
the  really  good  men  of  New  England,  and  are  non- 
professors  the  really  bad  men  ?     I  am  aware  that 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  35 

here  I  come  close  upon  a  disputed  dogmatical  ques- 
tion, and  I  grant  that  a  fancied  real  distinction  has 
something  to  do  with  this  outward  nominal  distinc- 
tion. But  go  into  any  community  where  this  eccle- 
siastical classification  prevails,  and  will  you  hear  any 

one  saying,  "  Why!  Mr. is  a  good  man,  and 

therefore  I  wonder  he  does  not  attend  the  prayer- 
meeting  !  "  Is  not  the  wonder  and  the  reproach  more 
often  this,  — "  He  is  a  professor,  and  therefore  he 
ought  to  attend  the  prayer-meeting  "  ?  This  distinc- 
tion, the  basis  of  this  expectancy,  is  not  that  some 
men  are  really  good,  and  therefore  should  do  thus 
and  so,  and  the  rest  are  really  bad,  and  therefore  it  i? 
of  no  consequence  what  they  do ;  it  is  simply  pro- 
fession and  non-profession.  The  mere  fact  that  a 
man  is  a  professor,  not  that  he  is  really  a  good  man, 
determines  at  once  the  popular  expectation  in  regard 
to  him.  So,  I  say,  speculative  theology,  here  in  New 
England  and  elsewhere,  divides  the  human  race. 

Consider  now  the  operation  of  such  a  division  on 
the  exterior  and  interior  religion  of  New  England. 
These  professors,  or  converted  men,  as  they  were 
reputed  to  be,  were  supposed  to  have  joys  and 
hopes  that  others  had  not.  They  were  addressed 
from  the  pulpit  differently  from  others.  They  were 
deemed  to  be  God's  elect,  and  called  God's  people. 
When  they  died,  it  was  presumed  they  went  to 
heaven.  All  outward  religious  duties  and  privileges 
devolved  to  them,  such  as  prayer,  communion,  bap- 
tism, &c.  They  constituted  the  Church.  Presently 
they  began  to  assert  some  special  rights.  They 
claimed  the  exclusive  right  to  choose  and  settle  the 


36  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

minister.  But  the  others,  the  non-professors,  had  to 
help  pay  the  minister's  salary.  Hence  a  dispute  arose 
between  them.  The  professors,  commonly  called 
the  Church,  yielded  so  far  as  to  say,  "  We  will  nomi- 
nate the  minister,  and  you  may  have  a  voice  in  his 
election."  In  the  case  of  Brattle  Street  Church, 
Boston,  now  Unitarian,  the  non-professors  went  to 
the  point  of  insisting  that,  as  they  were  equally  in- 
terested in  the  minister  with  the  rest,  they  would  not 
only  vote  in  his  election,  but  they  would  have  an 
equal  voice  also  in  his  nomination.  And  it  has 
since  come  to  pass  in  all  the  Liberal  churches  of 
New  England,  that  professors  and  non-professors 
unite  in  the  choice  and  settlement,  as  well  as  the 
maintenance,  of  the  minister.  This  ecclesiastical 
distinction  was  one  of  the  causes  of  the  rise  and 
development  of  denominational  Liberal  churches 
in  New  England. 

After  Whitefield's  time,  professors  began  to  tighten 
the  reins,  and  to  insist  more  strenuously  than  ever  on 
their  prerogatives.  It  was  asked  by  them,  —  and 
on  the  common  Calvinistic  ground  there  was  much 
pertinence  in  the  question,  —  Why  should  sinners, 
unconverted,  depraved,  and  vicious  men,  be  allowed 
to  choose  a  minister?  How  could  they  undertake 
to  determine  who  should  dispense  God's  message  ? 
And  gradually  the  non-professors  began  more  and 
more  to  be  excluded  from  all  voice  and  influence  in 
church  affairs.  In  some  instances  in  Massachusetts, 
as  members  of  the  parish  they  actually  outvoted 
the  professors  and  bore  them  down;  but  in  other 
cases  the  professors  got  the  upperhand   and  drove 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  37 

off  the  non-professors.  The  upshot  of  the  matter 
was  the  fixed  establishment  of  distinctively  Liberal 
churches.  Several  of  the  older  Massachusetts  Uni- 
tarian churches  sprung  directly  out  of  this  oppug- 
nance  between  professors  and  non-professors.  In 
some  cases  the  non-professors  withdrew  and  formed 
congregations,  settled  pastors,  and  sustained  Chris- 
tian ordinances  of  their  own.  I  am  aware  that  what 
is  called  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  New  England 
does  not  state  the  case  just  as  I  have  stated  it,  but 
such,  nevertheless,  is  the  actual  truth. 

I  pass  to  the  more  impressive  fact  already  inti- 
mated, that  the  entire.catalogue  of  vital  and  practi- 
cal religious  duties  was  lifted  wholly  from  one  class, 
and  left  resting  wholly  upon  the  other;  the  thing 
was  as  palpably,  as  clearly  done,  as  if  I  were  to 
take  this  Bible  from  one  side  of  the  desk,  and  lay 
it  over  on  the  other.  Nobody  was  expected  to  pray, 
to  be  in  the  habit  of  prayer,  except  professors,  or  the 
so-called  Church.  I  do  not  say  that  all  others  were 
forbidden  to  pray,  but  nobody  else  was  expected  to 
pray.  I  am  certain  of  this,  that  not  only  was  no 
one  expected,  but  no  one  was  allowed,  to  partake 
of  the  communion,  except  professors.  It  was  so  in 
respect  to  manifold  other  duties.  The  great  majority 
of  people  virtually  relapsed  from  all  sense  of  their 
Christian  and  religious  obligations. 

Now,  what  is  presented  in  all  this  but  a  direct 
impugnment,  rejection,  and  overthrow  of  that  cardi- 
nal principle  of  Christ,  and  of  common  sense,  that 
Christian  and  religious  duties  are  imposed  and  rest 
upon  all  men,  according  to  their  several  ability  ?     I 


38  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

know  of  nothing  in  any  country  or  age,  under  any 
form  of  religion,  Heathen,  Jewish,  Mohammedan, 
or  Christian,  like  this,  which,  in  its  most  striking  de- 
velopment, we  behold  round  about  us,  —  that  the  per- 
sonal, private,  peculiar  obligations  of  religion  are 
thought  to  pertain  to  only  an  insignificant  fraction 
of  a  given  community.  The  public  ministrations 
of  religion,  possibly,  may  be  in  some  cases  more 
select,  and  ecclesiastical  functions  more  sparingly 
bestowed,  but  not  the  personal  and  familiar  duties 
of  religion. 

According  to  this  order  of  things  we  have  all  been 
educated  ;  in  it  we  have  received  our  nurture  and  ad- 
monition ;  it  is  a  part  of  our  personal  history  ;  it  is 
cradled  among  our  instincts  and  sentiments ;  the 
great  majority  of  even  this  congregation  are  at  this 
moment  under  the  almost  despotic  control  of  this 
marvellous  hallucination.  Yet  nature  struggles 
against  it,  —  our  riper  reason  is  against  it,  —  all  laws 
of  human  association  and  the  general  law  of  human 
happiness  are  against  this  anomalous,  monstrous  di- 
vorce between  professors  and  non-professors.  Un- 
derstand me,  my  friends ;  I  say  nothing  against  the 
propriety  or  advantages,  or  even  duty,  of  making  a 
formal  avowal  of  religious  faith.  That  may  be 
well.  I  am  only  undertaking  now  to  exhibit  the 
lamentable  fact,  that,  while  all  the  highest  obliga- 
tions before  God,  all  religious  and  Christian  duties, 
devolve  to  every  man,  professor  or  non-professor, 
according  to  his  ability,  yet  here  in  this  community 
all  such  duties  are  distributed  according  to  pro- 
fession.    It  may  be  one  of  our  duties  to  make  such 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  39 

a  profession,  but  even  that  duty  is  to  be  discharged 
according  to  every  man's  ability.  It  was  not  enough 
that  mankind  had  been  voted  depraved  and  natu- 
rally averse  from  religion,  but  the  clergy,  the  divines, 
the  learned  theologians,  have  deliberately  taken  from 
them  a  sense  of  the  obligations  of  a  religious  life. 

But  many  things,  I  say,  are  against  this  divorce, 
and  tend  to  promote  a  reunion.  A  hundred  years 
ago,  professors  tried  to  keep  aloof  from  non-profes- 
sors in  the  matter  of  choosing  their  ministers;  but  in 
many  churches  they  came  together,  and  I  believe 
there  is  not  now  a  church  in  this  State  that  would 
venture  upon  calling  or  settling  a  minister  without 
free  and  full  consultation  with  what  it  pleases  to  call 
the  world.  So  in  forming  a  parish,  erecting  a  meet- 
ing-house, providing  for  support  of  ministers,  there 
is  at  this  day  no  recognized  distinction  between  the 
two  classes.  Converted  and  unconverted  men  are 
seen  wending  their  way  to  the  house  of  God  in  com- 
pany. When  it  is  desirable  to  sell  pews,  I  believe 
the  money  of  an  impenitent  sinner  is  as  readily  ac- 
cepted, if  not  as  highly  esteemed,  as  that  of  a  regen- 
erate man.  In  the  matter  of  Sunday  schools,  al- 
though it  is  generally  desirable,  yet  it  is  not  always 
the  case,  that  the  Superintendent  is  a  professor.  In 
respect  to  the  teachers,  I  believe  they  will  be  usually 
found  to  consist  of  both  classes,  and  as  for  the  schol- 
ars there  are  rarely  any  professors  among  them.  In 
missionary  movements,  so  far  as  its  pecuniary  basis 
and  general  home  management  are  concerned,  no 
discrimination  is  made.  Non-professors  attend  the 
monthly  concerts  of  prayer,  the  names  of  non-profes- 


40  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

sors  may  be  found  in  the  lists  of  members  and  sub- 
scribers. In  rural  gatherings,  Sunday-school  celebra- 
tions, parish  meetings,  the  Church  and  the  world  meet 
on  equal  footing.  It  is  no  uncommon  event  for  a 
professor  to  marry  one  who  is  not,  and  clergymen 
are  nothing  loth  to  sanction  this  vital,  indissoluble 
compact  between  parties,  one  of  whom  they,  theoret- 
ically, believe  to  be  wholly  corrupt,  a  child  of  the 
Devil,  and  the  other  they  presume  to  have  met  with 
a  change,  and  to  be  a  child  of  God.  I  may  observe 
that  the  family  to  a  very  considerable  extent  serves 
to  confound  and  annihilate  this  ecclesiastical  dis- 
tinction, inasmuch  as  under  the  same  roof,  around 
the  same  table,  and  in  all  that  belongs  to  home,  and 
its  sacred ness,  depth,  and  beauty,  professors  and  non- 
professors  are  everywhere  mingled  in  together.  In 
raising  funds  for  the  endowment  of  theological 
schools,  no  such  distinction  is  kept  up.  In  all  that 
pertains  to  the  personal  comfort  or  necessities  of  the 
minister  and  his  household,  men  of  both  classes  pro- 
miscuously are  seen  to  engage. 

What  I  have  mentioned  are  some  of  the  religious 
relations  in  which  the  Church  and  the  world  of  any 
given  parish  are  found  to  unite.  I  need  not  say  how 
in  benevolent  and  philanthropic  enterprises  they  are 
mutual  helpers  and  co-workers  ;  in  efforts  for  reliev- 
ing the  poor,  in  the  temperance  reform,  in  behalf  of 
peace  and  universal  emancipation,  they  all  move 
together.  But  it  is  of  what  belongs  peculiarly  to 
religion  that,  I  would  chiefly  speak.  And  I  observe 
there  is  an  increasing  tendency  to  a  reunion  between 
professors  and  non-professors.     Is  there  any  harm  in 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  41 

this  ?  Does  the  Church  lose  any  thing  thereby  ?  Is 
sound  piety  endangered  ?  Is  the  Church  coming 
down  to  the  world,  or  the  world  rising  up  to  the 
Church? 

In  the  opening  of  this  discourse  I  stated  what 
Christ  had  laid  down  for  us,  as  the  great  law  of  hu- 
man obligation,  in  respect  of  what  is  highest  and 
holiest ;  that  in  every  man  duty  is  proportioned  to 
ability.  I  have  taken  an  historical  review  of  a  portion 
of  Christendom,  and  shown  how  this  law  has  been 
set  at  naught,  and  how  it  has  been  attempted  to 
segregate  a  class  of  men  on  whom  peculiarly  and 
solely  these  obligations  should  rest.  I  have  said 
how,  in  process  of  time  and  in  the  providence  of 
God,  even  these  inveterate  distinctions  begin  to  give 
way,  and  that  all  classes  are  found  coalescing  more 
and  more  in  certain  religious  relations.  I  arfi  now 
prepared  to  make  a  seasonable,  and  I  trust  an  ef- 
fective, application  of  the  doctrine  of  the  text. 

I  see,  my  friends,  how  you  are  situated.  I  know 
how  most  of  you  have  been  educated.  I  can  allow 
for  all  the  subtle  influences  that  are  biasing  at  once 
your  nature  and  your  reason.  I  have  spoken  of  cer- 
tain things,  perhaps  some  will  deem  them  among  the 
lesser  and  unessential  things,  in  which  the  world  actu- 
ally does  unite  with  the  Church.  Shall  we  stop  there  ? 
Shall  we  carry  the  healing  process  no  further  ?  It 
may  be  God  will  carry  it  further  in  spite  of  us.  A 
few  years  since,  when  professors,  as  I  have  said, 
would  not  permit  non-professors  to  have  a  voice  in 
the  choice  of  a  minister,  those  very  non-professors 
drew  off  and  built  a  meeting-house  and  settled   a 

4* 


42  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

minister  for  themselves.  It  may  yet  happen  that 
non-professors  will  withdraw  and  set  up  a  commun- 
ion-table likewise.  But  that  is  not  exactly  the 
point  I  am  concerned  about,  as  I  fear  it  is  a  result 
of  which  there  is  little  hope.  The  danger  is  rather 
in  an  opposite  direction.  While  indeed  many  things 
indicate  that  non-professors  are  awakening  to  some 
sense  of  their  duty  and  privileges,  I  fear  they  will 
stop  far  short  of  their  whole  duty. 

But  ought  there  not  to  be  distinction  between 
professors  and  those  who  are  not,  between  church- 
members,  so  called,  and  the  world,  so  called?  I  am 
not  now  discussing  that  question,  nor  am  I  obliged, 
to  notice  it,  except  to  observe  that  this  is  not  a  happy 
way  of  propounding  the  true  question.  Our  modern 
notions  of  the  Church  and  church-membership  are 
wholly  foreign  to  the  New  Testament.  But  as  to 
the  practical  effect  of  the  distinction,  it  was  well 
tested  some  years  ago  in  the  matter  of  settling  min- 
isters ;  let  those  renew  the  experiment  who  will. 
Refuse  to  give  a  man  a  voice  in  the  choice  of  his 
pastor,  and  then  go  to  him  with  the  subscription- 
paper.  Nay,  to  be  consistent,  having  refused  his 
vote,  refuse  also  his  subscription,  and  finish  up,  con- 
summate the  desired  distinction,  by  shutting  him  out 
of  the  meeting-house  altogether.  Let  not  the  un- 
converted appear  in  the  assembly  at  all  I  Thus  the 
separation  of  the  Church  and  the  world  would  be 
complete;  then  it  would  be  seen  at  a  glance,  who 
were  Christians  and  who  were  not.  But  see  how 
this  distinction  has  actually  disappeared  in  the  Sun- 
day school.     There  you  will  find  unconverted  per- 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  43 

sons,  non-professors,  the  world,  teaching  the  Bible 
to  the  children,  some  of  whom,  it  may  be,  are  them- 
selves church-members. 

There  is  the  duty  of  prayer.  Respecting  this  there 
may  be  a  diversity  of  gifts.  All  persons  cannot  lead 
in  miscellaneous  social  devotion.  In  this,  as  in  many 
other  cases,  some  have  ten  talents,  some  five,  others 
only  one ;  but  to  each  man  is  the  talent  or  duty  al- 
lotted, according  to  his  ability.  Take,  now,  a  case  like 
this.  A  non-professor  gives  money  to  the  mission- 
ary cause ;  at  the  monthly  concert,  prayer  is  put  up 
in  its  behalf;  it  is  customary  to  pray  for  success  to 
the  end  and  for  a  blessing  on  the  means.  Now  is  it 
not  absurd  to  imagine  that  a  man  may  give  money 
for  a  religious  object,  and  yet  have  no  power  to  pray 
for  a  blessing  on  what  he  does ;  absurd  to  suppose 
that  God  will  accept  a  man's  pecuniary  offering  and 
not  his  prayers  ?  I  lay  it  down  as  a  rule,  which  I 
think  no  reasonable  man  will  wish,  and  no  bigot  dare, 
to  dispute,  that  whenever  and  for  whatsoever  a  non- 
professor,  a  technically  unconverted  man,  may  bestow 
pecuniary  aid,  then,  and  for  just  that,  he  not  only  may 
pray,  but  he  is  bound  to  pray.  And  as  to  speaking 
in  social  religious  meetings,  the  same  law  applies. 
It  is  not  the  peculiar  duty  of  professors  of  religion  to 
do  this ;  it  is  every  man's  duty,  in  proportion  to  his 
intelligence,  capacity,  and  opportunity. 

Then  as  to  miscellaneous  Christian  duties  :  to  let 
our  light  shine,  to  overcome  evil  with  good,  to  love 
God  and  our  neighbor,  to  be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of 
our  mind,  to  put  away  lying,  to  be  humble  and  sub- 
missive, to   edify   one  another,  to   repent  of  sin, — 


44  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

these,  and  more  that  I  might  name,  all  belong  to 
every  man  of  us,  according  to  our  ability.  They 
belong  to  no  set  of  men,  but  are  equally  imperative 
on  every  man  in  Christendom,  who  has  intelligence, 
capacity,  and  opportunity  therefor.  The  text,  to 
walk  worthy  of  the  vocation  wherewith  ye  are  called, 
ordinarily  preached  to  professors,  is  as  applicable 
to  one  man  in  a  Christian  land  as  to  another.  We 
are  all  called  of  God  and  to  God.  .We  are  called  to 
virtue,  to  holiness,  to  Christ ;  and  we  are  every  one 
of  us  bound  to  honor  our  vocation  according  to  our 
several  ability. 

There  is  the  duty  of  the  baptism  of  children  ; 
where  in  the  Bible  is  it  said  the  children  of  profes- 
sors shall  be  baptized  ?  If  it  is  one  parent's  duty  to 
have  his  children  baptized,  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
other.  It  is  the  duty  of  every  man  according  to  his 
ability.  If  you  can  understand  this  rite,  if  you  be- 
lieve in  it,  if  you  have  a  proper  sense  of  it,  you  cer- 
tainly have  the  capacity  and  the  opportunity,  and 
it  becomes  your  duty,  to  conform  to  it. 

There  is  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper ;  we 
know  about  this ;  we  know  how  it  is  viewed  ;  but 
can  you  show  me  the  least  warrant  for  the  prevailing 
scruples?  can  you  show  me  one  line  of  Scripture 
that  limits  this  ordinance  to  a  scant  and  select  por- 
tion of  a  Christian  community  ?  Christ  says.  Do 
this  in  remembrance  of  me.  Can  you  tell  me  why  it 
is  my  duty  to  thus  remember  him,  and  not  yours  ? 
'•'  O,  but  you  are  a  professor  !  "  It  is  not  one  whit 
more  my  duty  than  yours.  Have  you  intelligence, 
capacity,  and    opportunity   therefor?      Answer   me 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  45 

that.  Therein  is  contained  the  key  to  your  duty  in 
this  matter. 

You  see,  my  friends,  where  the  application  of  this 
subject  brings  us.  I  have  no  design  in  what  I  say 
to  inveigh  against  any  body  or  any  thing ;  my  sin- 
gle aim  is  to  rectify  the  conditions  of  religious  ob- 
ligation. I  wish  to  snatch  a  burden  that  has  been 
unnaturally  and  unwarrantably  laid  upon  a  few,  and 
distribute  it  amongst  all.  Granting  that  certain 
people  have  taken  upon  themselves  these  duties,  they 
have  no  right  to  any  exclusive  distinction  thereby. 
The  mass  of  our  people,  like  serfs  in  despotic  coun- 
tries, like  slaves  in  our  own,  under  the  present  sys- 
tem have  grown  supine,  dull,  indifferent  to  their 
duties,  privileges,  and  obligations.  I  would  arouse 
them  to  a  sense  of  what  they  are  losing.  I  would 
kindle  them,  so  to  say,  to  some  purposes  of  rebellion 
against  this  usurpation.  I  would  incite  them  to  the 
resumption  of  their  God-given  prerogatives.  A  pro- 
fessor of  religion  has  no  more  right,  and  is  under  no 
more  obligation,  to  pray,  to  have  family  prayer,  or 
make  public  prayer,  than  you.  Each  one  of  you  has 
the  same  right,  and  is  under  the  same  obligation,  to 
do  so.  I  care  not  what  the  clergy  may  say,  —  I  care 
not  what  the  popular  sentiment  has  sanctioned,  —  I 
care  not  what  the  prevailing  custom  is ;  it  is  all 
wrong,  —  wrong  before  God,  wrong  in  the  light  of 
the  Bible,  a  wrong  to  our  deepest  convictions. 

In  the  eleven  years  that  I  have  been  pastor  of  this 
church,  I  have  never  yet  preached  a  discourse  solely 
and  pointedly  to  technical  professors,  as  such ;  and 
for  the  reason,  that  every  obligation  that  rests  upon 


46  CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL. 

them,  rests  with  due  weight  upon  every  man  in  the 
parish  according  to  his  ability.  Every  man  of  us  is 
bound  to  live  well,  not  according  to  his  profession, 
but  according  to  his  intelligence,  capacity,  and  op- 
portunity. Here  is  a  poor  person  to  be  relieved,  a 
sick  man  to  be  prayed  with  and  comforted,  a  vicious 
man  to  be  reformed ;  it  is  not  the  professor's  duty 
to  do  it  solely  and  exclusively,  it  is  every  man's 
duty  according  to  his  ability.  The  great  mass  feel 
that  they  have  nothing  to  do  but  sin  ;  they  are  not 
expected  to  pray,  they  may  not  commune,  they  may 
not  participate  in  the  public  exercises  of  religion,  and 
so  they  are  left  to  abide  in  their  sins.  Yet  out  of 
the  goodness  of  their  hearts  they  come  with  their 
money,  and  ask  to  be  permitted  to  pay  a  little  to- 
wards the  church  expenses  and  the  church  needs,  and 
their  money  is  always  well  received.  Bad,  most 
bad,  most  unchristian  state  of  things !  Let  us  do 
what  we  can  to   change  it. 

Will  you,  each  one  of  you,  my  hearers,  ponder  upon 
the  great  truth  of  this  discourse,  the  weightier  truth  of 
Jesus?  Need  I  say,  that  nature  does  not  discrimi- 
nate among  us,  whether  we  are  professors  or  not ;  the 
season  smiles,  and  the  harvest  ripens  for  us  all  alike. 
Neither  does  the  discipline  of  life  discriminate ;  — 
temptation,  sadness,  and  woe  overtake  us  all.  Neither 
does  sickness  discriminate,  nor  the  grave.  Neither 
will  the  Judgment  discriminate.  The  simple  question 
of  that  day  will  be.  Have  we  the  talents  committed  to 
us,  ten,  five,  one  ;  and  have  we  been  good  and  faithful 
servants  over  them  ?  God  is  going  to  reap  among 
these  non-professors,  just  as  surely  as  he  will  among 


CHRISTIAN    OBLIGATIONS    UNIVERSAL.  47 

the  professors.  And  he  has  sown  here,  too  ;  for  eleven 
years  at  least,  may  I  not  say,  his  truth  has  been  sown 
in  all  your  hearts.  God  is  going  to  gather  among 
these  non-professors,  just  as  much  as  among  the  pro- 
fessors; and  he  is  not  a  hard  man,  reaping  where 
he  has  not  sown,  and  gathering  where  he  has  not 
strewed.  He  has  been  sowing  and  strewing  here 
now  these  many  years.  O,  will  any  one  of  us  be 
the  wicked  and  slothful  servant  ?  Will  we  imitate 
his  conduct  and  invite  his  doom  ? 


SERMON    IV. 


"What  is  the  church? 

THAT  THOF  MATEST  KNOW  HOW"  THOTJ  OUGHTEST  TO  BEHAVE 
THYSELF  IN  THE  HOUSE  OF  GOD,  WHICH  IS  THE  CHURCH  OF 
THE    LIVING   GOD,   THE    PILLAR   AND    GROUND    OF    THE    TRUTH. — 

1  Tim.  iii.  15. 

The  Church,  the  Church  of  God,  the  Evangelical 
Church,  the  Holy  and  Apostolic  Church,  —  what  is 
it  ?  where  is  it  ?  who  is  it  ? 

There  is  the  Greek  Church,  prevalent  in  Greece, 
Turkey,  Russia,  numbering  seventy  million  souls  ; 
is  that  the  Church  ?  There  is  the  Roman  Church 
with  one  hundred  and  twenty  million  adherents, 
the  English  Church  and  its  branch  in  this  country, 
the  Church  of  Scotland,  the  Nestorian  Church,  the 
Lutheran  Church,  the  Abyssinian  Church ;  are  any 
of  these,  or  all  of  them,  the  Church  ?  The  Church 
is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth.  Are  these 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth  ?  The  Church  is 
that  by  which  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God  is  made 
known,  according  to  the  eternal  purpose  which  he 
purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  In  this  sense, 
are  these  the  Church  ?  Are  they  the  body  of  Christ, 
or  that  of  which  Christ  is  the  head,  which  is  the 
Church  ? 


WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ?  49 

For  the  sake  of  convenience,  and  according  to  the 
natural  laws  of  language,  we  apply  the  term  clwrch 
to  a  variety  of  things,  as  to  a  building,  to  a  sect 
organically  considered,  to  a  body  of  professors.  But 
the  New  Testament  does  not  state  the  thing  in  this 
way.  According  to  that,  the  Church  is  a  body,  com- 
prising men,  women,  and  children,  of  which  Christ 
is  the  head.  "  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  body,  the 
Church."  The  husband  is  the  head  of  the  wife, 
even  as  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  Church ;  and  he  is 
the  saviour  of  the  body. 

There  is  no  such  language  in  the  Bible  as  mem- 
ber of  a  church.  According  to  the  evangelical  idea, 
we  are  members  of  Christ.  "  Ye  are  the  body  of 
Christ,  and  members  in  particular."  "  For  no  man 
ever  yet  hated  his  own  flesh,  but  nourisheth  and 
cherisheth  it,  even  as  the  Lord  the  Church  :  for  we 
are  members  of  his  body,  of  his  flesh,  and  of  his 
bones."  "  Know  ye  that  your  bodies  are  members 
of  Christ?"  Again,  we  are  members,  not  of  a 
church,  but  of  one  another.  The  allusion  in  the 
Bible  is  not  to  a  body  politic,  or  to  a  body  corporate, 
but  to  the  body  vital.  The  reference  is  strictly  an 
anatomical  one.  Here  is  a  structure,  an  animal 
organization,  like  to  our  own  bodies,  of  which  Christ 
is  supposed  to  be  the  head,  the  brain,  the  heart;  and 
we  are  members,  as  hands,  feet.  This  is  the  Gospel 
idea  of  ihe  Church. 

Let  us  suppose  a  living  organism  to  pervade  crea- 
tion, so  far  as  intelligent  beings  are  concerned  ; 
veins  and  arteries  of  spiritual  life  flow  back  and 
forth  through  the  whole  ;  as  respects  man  and  the 


50  WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ? 

earth,  Christ  is  the  head  of  that  body,  and  we  are 
members,  and  God  is  the  head  of  Christ ;  he  is  head 
over  all,  he  is  the  immense,  universal  life.  We  in 
this  become  members  of  Christ's  body;  yea,  even  of 
his  bones  and  of  his  flesh. 

This  vital,  living  allusion  is  also  preserved  in  that 
other  language,  I  am  the  vine,  ye  are  the  branches, 
and  my  Father  is  the  husbandman.  The  heart  of 
God,  so  to  say,  pulsating  through  the  universe,  beats 
in  Jesus  Christ  and  in  all  his  followers.  There  is 
not  only  one  body,  but  one  faith,  one  baptism.  The 
connecting  element,  the  arterial  tide,  is  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  runs  like  blood  through  all  pure  souls, 
or  blows  like  the  wind  across  the  continent  of  rational 
being.  Most  intimate  and  very  strong  phraseology 
is  kept  up  on  this  subject  all  through  the  New  Tes- 
tament. He  that  dwells  in  love  dwells  in  God,  and 
God  in  him.  Christ  desires  that  his  people  may  be 
one  in  him  and  God,  even  as  he  is  one  with  God. 
This  unfolds  the  radical  and  primary  Gospel  idea  of 
the  Church. 

Again,  there  is  a  secondary  idea,  that  of  a  num- 
ber of  men  in  a  given  place,  who  are  members  of 
Christ  and  of  one  another;  arterially,  vitally,  joined 
to  Christ  and  God,  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Thus  we 
read  of  the  Church  in  Nymphas's  house,  the  Church 
at  Antioch  ;  that  is,  a  number  of  people  who  in  those 
places  were  members  of  Christ,  a  part  of  the  Divine 
organization  in  the  universe.  We  read  of  persons 
being  added  to  the  Church  ;  being  added  to  the  num- 
ber of  such  members,  or  added  to  that  Divine  organ- 
ization in  the  universe,  which  consists  of  God,  Christ, 
and  man  united  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 


WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ?  51 

Wherever,  in  any  part  of  the  world,  appeared  peo- 
ple breaking  away  from  Paganism,  or  Judaism,  and 
accepting  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  they  were 
called  the  Church.  As  this  number  increased,  they 
chose  elders,  presbyters,  bishops  (overseers),  pastors, 
ministers  to  be  over  them. 

There  is  no  such  thing  in  the  New  Testament  as 
whatw^e  call  joining  the  Church  ;  that  is,  outwardly 
joining  a  company  or  society ;  as  we  say,  joining  the 
Odd  Fellows.  The  moment  a  man  truly  accepted 
Christ,  he  was  a  member  of  the  Church  ;  that  is,  he 
was  a  member  of  Christ,  a  member  of  the  Divine 
organization,  a  partaker  of  the  New  Covenant. 

Will  you  observe  this  language  ?  "  The  Lord  daily 
added  to  the  Church  of  such  as  should  be  saved." 
Daily.  People  w^ere  not  "  converted,"  and  then  kept 
waiting  two  or  three  months  before  they  could  join 
the  Church.  The  moment  the  Jewish  eunuch  be- 
lieved that  Jesus  Christ  was  the  Son  of  God,  the 
moment  the  heathen  jailer  believed,  he  was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Church. 

The  primary  meaning  of  the  word  church  is  as- 
sembly, congregation,  any  collection  of  people.  Its 
particular  meaning  is  an  assembly  or  congregation  of 
people  united  to  Christ.  It  is  par  excellence  the  as- 
sembly, the  congregation,  as  the  Bible  is  The  Book. 
Churches  are  assemblies  or  congregations,  or*  num- 
bers of  Christian  people.  This  institution  called  the 
Church  is  of  great  account  in  the  Bible.  Christ  loved 
the  Church,  and  gave  himself  for  it ;  he  cherisheth  and 
nourisheth  it ;  he  designed  it  for  a  glorious  Church. 

But  there  is  something  extant  in  our  day,  calling 
itself  the  Church,  —  as  the  Greek,  or  Latin,  or  Eng- 


52  WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ? 

lish,  or  Baptist,  or  JMethodist  Church,  —  about  which 
even  good  men  are  suspicious.  We  find  some  most 
excellent  men  outside  of  it.  They  leave  the  Church, 
they  disown  it,  they  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  it. 
We  find  other  excellent  people  whom  you  could  no 
more  persuade  to  join  the  Church,  than  Daniel  could 
have  been  induced  to  join  in  the  worship  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. Is  this  what  Christ  and  the  Bible  mean 
by  the  Church  ? 

In  the  text,  Timothy,  who  had  just  entered  the 
pastoral  office,  is  directed  how  to  behave  or  conduct 
himself  in  the  house  of  God,  —  not  meeting-house, 
but  household,  family,  or  assembly  of  God, —  which 
is  the  Church  of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and 
ground  (the  stay)  of  the  truth.  The  first  idea,  then, 
of  the  Church,  considered  in  respect  of  its  action 
and  duty,  is,  that  it  is  the  pillar  and  ground  or  stay 
of  the  truth.  Of  course,  it  follows  that  that  which 
is  the  pillar  and  stay  of  error  is  not  the  Church  of 
God.  This  is  a  plain  test.  The  doctrine  that  Christ 
is  very  and  eternal  God,  of  one  substance  with  the 
Father,  is  an  error,  a  grave  error,  one  of  the  most 
salient  and  pernicious  heresies  ever  promulgated. 
Whatever  is  the  pillar  and  stay  of  such  an  error  is 
not  the  Church.  It  may  be  a  church,  it  may  have 
something  in  common  w4th  the  true  Church,  but 
it  is  not  the  Church. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  destroys  the  whole 
idea  of  the  Church,  as  it  is  set  forth  in  the  Bible, 
which  is,  that  believers  are  members  of  Christ,  even 
of  his  flesh  and  of  his  bones.  If  Christ  be  God, 
they  cannot  be  members  of  him,  except  through  Pan- 


WHAT    IS    THE     CHURCH  ?  53 

theism.  A  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  is 
that  God  is  over  all, — that  Christ,  man,  all  things, 
are  inferior  to  God.  The  notion  that  Christ  is  very 
and  eternal  God,  of  one  substance  with  the  Father, 
overthrows  the  Divine  organization,  and  confounds 
the  economy  of  God  in  respect  of  the  Church. 
It  follows  that  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  English 
Churches  are  not  the  Church,  for  they  all  teach  and 
hold  uppermost  in  their  teachings  that  Christ  is  very 
and  eternal  God.  They  may  be  a  church  ;  their  in- 
dividual votaries  may  belong  to  the  true  Church  ; 
but,  considered  as  a  whole,  considered  as  a  body, 
they  are  not  the  Church.  No  man  who  joins  them 
joins  the  Church,  for  they  are  not  the  Church. 

Another  test  is  this,  that  Christ,  under  God,  is 
the  head  of  the  Church.  That  which  owns  any 
other  head  than  Christ  is  not  the  Church.  The 
Pope  is  accounted  the  head  of  the  Roman  Church. 
At  least,  we  know  that  every  man,  holding  any  sort 
of  post  in  that  Church,  is  obliged,  on  penalty  of  ex- 
communication, to  profess  and  swear  obedience  to  the 
Roman  Pontiff.  The  king  of  England,  by  the  fun- 
damental law  of  the  realm,  is  supreme  head  of  the 
Church.  I  am  aware  these  things  are  explained  as 
not  meaning  much  ;  but  when  every  man  in  the 
Romish  Church,  who  holds  office  in  that  Church,  is 
obliged  to  take  oath  to  obey,  not  Jesus  Christ,  but 
the  Roman  Pontiff;  when  every  man  who  holds 
office  in  England  is  bound  to  acknowledge,  under 
oath,  that  the  king  or  queen  is  supreme  head  of  the 
Church,  it  shows  how  wide  is  the  departure  from  the 
evangelical  idea  of  the  Church. 
5* 


54  WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ? 

A  third  test  of  the  Church  is,  that  it  is  that  by  which 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ  might 
be  made  known.  In  the  third  chapter  of  Ephesians 
Paul  is  speaking  of  the  unsearchable  riches  of  Christ, 
of  God's  promise  in  Christ,  of  the  mystery  that  had 
been  hidden  in  God  from  the  beginning  of  the  world, 
and  how  he  had  been  appointed  to  preach  thereof,  to 
the  intent  that  unto  the  principalities  and  powers  in 
heavenly  places  might  be  known  by  the  Church  the 
manifold  wisdom  of  God,  according  to  the  eternal 
purpose  which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus.  Imme- 
diate reference  is  here  had  to  the  fact  that  the  Gen- 
tiles should  be  fellow-heirs,  and  of  the  same  body, 
and  partakers  of  the  promise  of  God  by  Jesus  Christ. 
The  general  reference,  however,  is  to  what  he  else- 
where styles  the  great  mystery  of  the  Gospel,  — 
Christ  in  us  the  hope  of  glory.  Here  he  speaks  par- 
ticularly of  an  object  he  has  in  view,  that  Christ  may 
dwell  in  his  readers'  hearts ;  that,  being  rooted  and 
grounded  in  love,  they  may  know  the  love  of 
Christ,  and  be  filled  with  all  the  fulness  of  God. 
In  a  word,  the  wisdom  of  God  purposed  of  old  in 
Jesus  Christ,  here  referred  to,  is  what  we  now-a- 
days  call  the  scheme  of  redemption.  By  the  Church, 
then,  the  true  scheme  of  redemption  is  made  known. 
There  have  been  many  schemes  of  redemption. 
Some  churches  say  we  must  accept  Christ  as  an 
atoning  sacrifice  in  order  to  be  saved.  Some  teach 
that  water-baptism  is  regenerative.  The  Roman 
Church  says  a  man  is  damned  who  rejects  the  de- 
crees of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  English  Church 
says  a  man  is  damned  who  rejects  the  Trinity  fabri- 


WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ?  55 

cated  at  Nice.  But  that  only  is  the  Church,  which 
teaches  the  scheme  of  redemption,  or  mystery  of 
God  in  Christ,  as  laid  down  in  the  Gospel. 

Here,  then,  are  three  very  plain  and  simple  tests 
of  the  Church.  First,  that  it  is  the  pillar  and  stay 
of  the  truth ;  second,  that  Christ  is  its  head ;  and 
third,  that  it  teaches  the  purpose  of  salvation  by 
Christ. 

These  three  things  are  found  in  this  Church.  First, 
it  is  the  pillar  and  stay  of  the  truth.  The  truth  in 
regard  to  God  and  man,  revelation  and  nature, 
humanity,  duty,  life,  death,  and  eternity,  is  here  en- 
forced and  maintained.  The  aim  of  Unitarianism 
has  ever  been  the  simple  truth  of  Scripture.  I  need 
not  refer  to  the  writings  of  Locke,  Lardner,  Norton, 
Channing,  Dewey.  The  truths  of  Unitarianism,  I 
mean  the  truths  which  God  in  his  providence  out  of 
the  Bible,  in  conjunction  with  human  reason,  has 
revealed  to  the  Unitarian  mind,  are  at  this  moment 
affecting,  modifying,  agitating,  reforming,  the  whole 
system  of  theology.  There  is  hardly  an  intelligent 
mind  in  the  land,  of  whatever  persuasion,  but  finds 
his  views  influenced  by  these  Unitarian  truths.  The 
dogmas  of  the  Trinity,  Total  Depravity,  Vicarious 
Atonement,  Baptismal  Regeneration,  everywhere  are 
giving  way,  either  in  substance  or  form,  to  the  light 
thus  manifested.  This  Church,  then,  is  the  pillar 
and  ground  or  stay  of  the  truth. 

Secondly,  it  acknowledges  Christ  as  its  head,  and 
rejects  all  other  heads.  Creeds  do  not  bind  it. 
Councils  are  not  its  authority,  it  has  no  king  or 
pope  to  whom  it  owes  allegiance.     It  has  no   arti- 


56 

cles,  aside  from  the  Gospel,  to  be  subscribed  as  a 
condition  of  fellowship.  You  acquire  admission 
to  it,  not  by  the  way  of  its  clergy,  but  by  way  of 
Christ.  Its  criteria  of  heresy  are  reason  and  revela- 
tion. Unitarian  churches,  each  and  all,  profess 
Christ  to  be  their  head.  I  know  no  exception  to 
this.  I  do  not  know  a  single  church  amongst  us 
that  puts  any  thing  but  the  Gospel  between  a  man 
and  his  duty.  I  do  not  know  of  a  single  church 
amongst  us  that  requires  of  its  ministers,  its  dea- 
cons, or  any  of  its  officers  or  agents,  any  thing  more 
than  a  belief  that  Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God,  or  a  be- 
lief in  the  words  and  teachings  of  Jesus  and  the 
Apostles.  By  this  test,  then,  this  is  the  Church,  that 
body  of  which  Christ  is  the  head. 

A  third  test  of  the  Church  is,  that  it  teaches  the 
method  of  salvation,  originating  in  the  wisdom  of 
God  and  developed  through  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 
This  indeed  may  be  variously  stated.  "  Christ  in 
you  the  hope  of  glory,"  is  the  summary  language  of 
St.  Paul.  It  is  making  Christ  our  Way  and  Truth 
and  Life ;  it  is  possessing  the  spirit  of  Christ ;  it  is 
bearing  the  fruit  of  the  spirit ;  it  is  receiving  the 
life  of  God  into  the  soul  through  Christ;  it  is  having 
Christ  manifested  in  our  mortal  bodies ;  it  is  dwell- 
ing in  love;  this  is  the  wisdom  of  God  according 
to  the  purpose  \vliich  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus 
our  Lord.  And  this  we  hold  and  teach.  By  this 
test  too  we  are  the  Church. 

There  is  a  definition  of  the  Church  in  these 
words:  "The  visible  Church  of  Christ  is  a  congre- 
gation of  faithful  men,  in  which  the  pure  word  of 


WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ?  57 

God  is  preached  and  the  sacraments  duly  adminis- 
tered according  to  Christ's  ordinances,  in  all  those 
things  that  of  necessity  are  requisite  to  the  same." 
And  by  this  te  t  the  Unitarian  body  are  the  Church. 

Heresy^  in  a  generic  view  of  the  term,  is  a  de- 
parture from  the  word  of  God.  The  doctrines  that 
Christ  is  very  and  eternal  God,  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  the  third  person  in  the  Godhead,  that  human 
nature  deserves  God's  wrath,  that  man  can  will  or 
do  no  good  thing,  that  relics  are  to  be  worshipped, 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  of  water-regenera- 
tion, &c.,  are  all  heresies,  all  departures  from  the 
wordW  God;  and  most  of  the  so-called  churches 
are,  herein,  heretical.  This  Church  rejects  these 
things  because  they  are  departures  from  the  word  of 
God.     This  Church  is  not  heretical. 

Orthodoxy  means  sound  doctrine.  That  is  sound 
doctrine  which  is  according  to  reason  and  Scrip- 
ture ;  or  which  is  according  to  the  word  of  God. 
The  Unitarian  Church  is  the  orthodox  Church. 

Catholic  means  general,  universal.  That  is  the 
Catholic  Church  which  sees  all  men  one  in  Christ, 
which  expands  its  sympathies  wide  as  humanity, 
which  recognizes  the  universal  brotherhood  of  the 
race.  The  Unitarian  Church  is  in  the  best  sense  the 
Catholic  Church. 

The  Apostolic  Church  is  that  which  has  the  same 
foundation  as  the  Apostles ;  that  is,  Christ.  This  is 
the  Apostolic  Church. 

Evangelical  is  simply  Greek  for  Gospel^  which  is 
Saxon  for  good  news.  The  message  of  the  angels 
was  good  news,  glad  tidings,  or  Gospel ;  the  whole 


58  WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH? 

scope  and  spirit  of  Christianity  is  good  news,  glad 
tidings,  Gospel,  Evangelical.  We  adhere  to  the 
whole  scope  and  spirit  of  Christianity;  hence  are 
we  the  Evangelical  Church. 

This,  my  friends,  is  Unitarianism.  Some  have 
been  suspicious  of  it  because  they  did  not  know 
what  it  would  lead  to.  It  seemed  to  be  a  departure 
from  the  old  standard,  and  where  it  might  end  was 
not  known.  This  is  what  it  leads  to,  the  recovery 
of  the  Church.  It  departs  from  dogmas  that  it  may 
find  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.  It  abjures  Roman- 
ism, Anglicanism,  Calvinism,  that  it  may  give  its 
allegiance  to  the  Gospel.  As  the  Israelites  left 
Egypt,  and  slavery,  and  onions,  and  garlic,  and  went 
on  till  they  found  the  promised  land,  so  have  we 
left  the  churches  of  prelates  and  dogmas,  of  slavery, 
and  of  plenty  to  eat,  that  we  might  find  the  true 
Church.  Our  fathers  left  the  despotism  of  the  Old 
World  to  build  up  a  glorious  commonwealth  in  the 
New.  So  Unitarianism,  if  it  has  seemed  to  wander 
many  months,  like  the  Mayflower,  on  an  unknown 
and  tempestuous  sea,  is  freighted  with  earnest,  truth- 
loving,  and  God-fearing  souls,  and  it  makes  land 
at  last  on  the  new  continent  of  thought  where  it 
may  build  up  a  glorious  church. 

There  are  in  this  matter  of  the  Church  what  may 
be  denominated  things  indifferent.  An  instance  is 
the  erection  of  places  of  worship,  meeting-houses, 
or,  as  they  are  wont  to  be  called,  churches.  There 
is  nothing  in  Scripture  commanding  or  forbidding 
these.  It  is  a  matter  which  Christ  left  to  the  good 
sense  and  discretion  of  his  followers. 


WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH  ?  59 

There  are  questions  of  names  for  particular 
churches.  The  name  of  this  is  Christ  Church,  a 
name  deliberately  adopted  by  the  congregation  wor- 
shipping here.  By  this  name  it  is  known  in  law. 
By  this  it  is  distinguished  from  other  churches  in 
town ;  as  the  Nazarene  church,  St.  Mark's  church. 

There  is  the  use  of  language.  We  speak  of 
church  order,  church  music,  church  organ,  church 
architecture,  church  bells,  church  going ;  we  speak 
too  of  Church  and  State,  we  have  histories  of  the 
Church.  All  this,  I  suppose,  is  a  proper  use  of  lan- 
guage. We  frequently  speak  of  going  to  meeting,  of 
attending  meeting.  You  go  to  the  church  ;  your 
place  of  worship  is  Christ  Church,  or  simply  the 
Church.  Some  people  say  they  attend  the  Unita- 
rian meeting;  rather  they  attend  Christ  Church,  or 
the  Church. 

In  England  people  are  divided  into  what  are  called 
Churchmen  and  Dissenters  ;  members  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  being  Churchmen,  and  all  others  Dis- 
senters. I  am  no  Dissenter,  and  I  repudiate  the  name. 
I  never  did  use  it,  and  never  will,  to  describe  myself 
or  my  brethren.  I,  we,  all  of  us,  are  Churchmen, 
and  for  the  simple  fact  that  we  adhere  to,  and  have 
never  left,  the  house  of  God,  which  is  the  Church 
of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and  stay  of  the  truth. 
The  real  dissenters  in  the  world  are  those  who  have 
departed  from  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel  of 
Christ. 

There  is  a  question  of  the  baptism  of  children. 
It  is  not  specifically  answered  in  Scripture.  Christ 
and    his    Apostles  dealt  chiefly    with    Pagans    and 


60  WHAT    IS    THE    CHURCH,? 

Jews.  The  question  for  us  is,  When  Christianity 
becomes  the  religion  of  a  country,  and  children  are 
born  to  Christian  parents,  how  ought  the  Church  to 
regard  them  ?  It  ought  to  baptize  them  and  cherish 
them  in  its  bosom  and  nurture. 

Who  are  members  of  the  Church  ?  All  who  are 
members  of  that  body  of  which  Christ  under  God 
is  the  head,  are  per  se  members  of  the  Church.  All 
who  accept  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  all  believers 
in  Christ,  are  members  of  the  Church.  We  are  all 
members  of  the  Church  just  so  far  as  we  love  God 
and  goodness.  All  who  do  justice,  love  mercy,  and 
walk  humbly  before  their  God,  are  members.  The 
peacemakers,  the  poor  in  spirit,  are  members.  When 
the  wicked  man  turneth  from  the  wickedness  he  hath 
committed,  and  doeth  that  which  is  lawful  and  right, 
he  becomes  a  member.  All  of  us,  my  friends,  just 
so  far  as  we  have  an  interest  in  Christ,  and  are  de- 
sirous to  know  his  truth,  to  do  his  will,  to  be  pos- 
sessed of  his  spirit,  to  imitate  his  example,  are  so 
far  forth  members  of  his  body,  and  are  his  Church. 
Just  so  far  as  we  seek  to  build  upon  the  foundation 
of  the  Prophets  and  Apostles,  Jesus  Christ  himself 
being  the  chief  corner-stone,  as  individuals  or  a 
community,  we  are  his  Church. 

You  see,  my  friends,  what,  as  part  of  the  Unita- 
rian and  Liberal  body,  our  position  is,  and  what 
God  is  calling  us  to,  and  how  we  are  bound  to  vin- 
dicate and  maintain  the  dispensation  committed 
unto  usi 


SERMON   V. 


BIKTH-RELATION   TO   THE   CHURCH. 

FOR  AS  WE  HATE  MANY  3IE3IBERS  IN  ONE  BODY,  AND  ALL  MEM- 
BERS HAVE  NOT  THE  SAME  OFFICE  ;  SO  WE,  BEING  MANY,  ARE 
ONE     BODY     IN     CHRIST,     AND     EVERY     ONE     MEMBERS     ONE     OP 

ANOTHER.  —  Romans  xii.  4,  5. 

I  HAVE  shown  that  we  are  The  Church  ;  also,  that 
all  religious  and  Christian  obligations  devolve  to 
every  man  according  to  his  several  ability. 

I  purpose  now  to  inquire  into  the  obligation  which 
every  man  sustains  to  the  Church.  I  have  already, 
under  the  general  argument,  intimated  that  every 
man  owes  obligation  to  prayer,  to  the  communion, 
and  other  pious  offices,  according  to  his  intelligence, 
capacity,  and  opportunity,  in  respect  of  such  things. 
I  purpose  at  the  present  time  to  consider  the  Church 
by  itself,  as  one  of  the  radical  forms  of  human  soci- 
ety, and  including  all  these  duties  under  the  sum- 
mary head  of  duties  which  the  Church  represents,  or 
which  are  its  peculiar  care.  I  purpose,  I  say,  to  in- 
quire into  the  ground  of  this  universal  obligation  to 
the  Church,  and  to  examine  more  particularly  the  na- 
ture of  our  relation  to  it. 

Why  does  every  man  of  us  owe  obligation  to  the 


62  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

Church  of  Christ,  or  that  which  the  Church  repre- 
sents, or  which  it  prescribes  ?  How  is  it  that  I,  as 
minister  of  the  Church,  can  urge  you,  all  of  you, 
without  discrimination,  to  the  performance  of  these 
duties?  There  must  be  involved  here  some  simple 
principle  of  reason  and  nature.  Can  we  discover  it? 
Why  does  a  man  owe  obligation  to  other  things,  in 
respect  of  which  such  obligation  is  supposed  to  ac- 
crue ?  Why  do  we  all  owe  obligation  to  the  state, 
to  the  government  of  this  empire  ?  Why  to  the 
family,  why  to  the  city,  why  to  society  in  general  ? 
Is  it  because  the  state,  the  family,  society  in  gen- 
eral, protects  us  and  does  us  good  ?  For  the  same 
reason  do  you  all  owe  obligation  to  the  Church,  inas- 
much as  it  protects  and  blesses  you  all.  It  invites 
you  all  within  its  walls,  it  pours  its  light  over  you  all, 
it  visits  you  all  in  sickness,  it  brings  your  children, 
without  distinction,  into  its  Sunday  schools,  and  is 
ever  ready  to  shield  your  virtues,  further  your  happi- 
ness, and  crown  you  with  immortal  life.  For  this 
cause,  then,  if  there  were  no  other,  you  are  all  obli- 
gated to  the  Church,  each  one  according  to  his  sev- 
eral ability. 

But  this  is  not  all ;  there  is  something  deeper  than 
this,  something  underlying  these  reasons.  I  observe 
that,  as  regards  a  great  variety  of  human  relations, 
hirth  is  the  primary  ground  of  obligation.  As  to  most 
of  what  may  be  called  the  great  natural  relations  of 
man,  this  is  the  primary  ground  of  obligation.  Why 
does  a  man  owe  obligations  to,  or  how  can  he  claim 
protection  from,  these  United  States  ?  Fundamen- 
tally, from  the  fact  that  he  is  born  here.     Why  is  an 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  63 

Englishman  similarly  situated  in  respect  of  England, 
or  a  Chinese  in  respect  of  China  ?  Mainly  from  the 
same  fact,  that  he  is  born  there.  Or  if  it  is  because 
we  are  citizens  of  this  republic,  how  came  we  to  be 
citizens  ?  As  regards  the  great  mass  of  us,  because 
we  were  born  here.  Birth  makes  every  man  a  citi- 
zen of  the  state,  and  he  is  to  be  so  considered,  until, 
by  some  overt  act,  he  forfeits  the  rights  of  citizen- 
ship. On  the  other  hand,  why  do  these  United 
States  owe  protection  to  us  ?  Fundamentally  for 
the  reason  I  have  stated,  that  we  are  born  here  ;  or 
if  because  we  are  citizens,  still  we  are  citizens  be- 
cause we  are  born  here. 

This  protection  is  owed  indiscriminately  to  man, 
woman,  and  child.  It  would  not  seem  to  be  earned  ; 
it  would  not  seem  to  be  in  recompense  of  good  deeds 
on  our  part.  This  government  owes  protection  to 
the  infant  of  a  day,  as  well  as  to  the  greatest  man  in 
the  land,  and  for  the  reason  that  it  is  born  here.  So 
the  family  owes  support  to  its  members,  fundamen- 
tally from  this  accident  of  birth.  So,  in  general, 
society  owes  something  to  all  that  are  born  into  it. 
So,  reciprocally,  all  persons  owe  something  to  so- 
ciety into  which  they  are  born. 

Let  me  illustrate  the  point.  Let  me  take  a  case 
so  far  removed  from  common  life  as  to  be  free  of  the 
objections  which,  from  a  thousand  causes,  in  treat- 
ing subjects  of  this  kind,  are  wont  to  embarrass  our 
view.  I  will  imagine  a  case  like  this  ;  that  a  num- 
ber of  unenlightened  and  heathen  people  are  thrown 
upon  an  uninhabited  island,  which  they  make  their 
permanent  abode.     In  a  few  years,  as  we  may  sup- 


64  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

pose,  they  become  in  a  measure  educated.  They 
wish  to  form  a  government,  and  found  a  nation. 
By  some  wonder,  they  discover  a  political  constitu- 
tion like  that  of  one  of  our  States.  They  adopt  it. 
In  all  solemnity  and  with  much  parade  it  is  pro- 
claimed the  fundamental  law  of  the  land.  By  and 
by  another  generation  springs  up ;  children  are  born  to 
these  first  settlers.  Have  they  any  thing  to  do  with 
this  constitution,  or  it  with  them  ?  Have  they  any 
right  to  it  ?  Are  they  in  the  state,  or  out  of  it  ? 
Do  they  belong  to  it,  or  are  they  in  a  condition  of 
outlawry  ?  They  are  part  of  the  state,  you  say. 
But  for  what  reason  ?  This,  simply  and  circularly, 
that  they  are  children  of  their  fathers.  In  other 
words,  birth  is  the  foundation  of  this  political  rela- 
tion. The  children  are  born  into  the  republic.  If 
you  please,  it  is  the  right  of  nature,  it  is  a  God-given 
right,  it  is  an  inalienable  right ;  yet,  the  literal,  prime 
foundation  of  the  right  is  birth. 

So  much  in  regard  of  the  State,  or  politics.  Let 
us  now  turn  to  the  matter  of  the  Church,  or  religion. 
We  will  suppose  this  people  in  some  way  to  find  a 
Bible,  and  to  become  believers  in  Christ,  and  to  ac- 
cept the  Gospel  as  their  rule  of  faith  and  guide  of 
life.  With  all  solemnity  and  prayer  in  the  great 
congregation  they  do  this.  In  other  words,  they 
form  a  church.  They  choose  a  pastor,  they  meet  on 
the  Sabbath,  they  have  the  sacraments.  They  be- 
come a  church,  a  body  Christian.  All  things  go  on 
well.  By  and  by  a  new  generation  springs  up. 
Where,  as  respects  the  church,  do  these  belong  ? 
Are  they  in  it,  or  out  of  it  ?     Do  they  owe  it  any 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  65 

thing,  or  it  them  ?  Are  they  parts  of  it,  or  in  a  con- 
dition of  outlawry,  disfranchisement,  excommunica- 
tion ?  Is  not  the  church  over  and  around  these 
children,  as  much  as  the  state  ?  Is  not  that  pastor 
pastor  of  all  the  people,  as  much  as  that  governor 
is  governor  of  all  the  people  ?  Need  I  make  formal 
answer  to  these  questions  ?  This  new  generation 
has  relations  to  the  church  in  virtue  of  birth.  These 
children  are  children  of  the  state  in  virtue  of  being 
children  of  their  parents,  and  for  the  same  reason 
are  they  children  of  the  church. 

I  can  perceive  no  flaw  in  this  course  of  argument. 
I  know  of  no  possible  escape  from  these  conclusions. 
That  church  is  as  much  beholden  to  the  children  of 
those  parents  as  that  state  is  ;  it  is  as  much  bound 
to  look  after  them,'  to  provide  for  their  weal  in 
spiritual  things,  as  the  state  is  in  temporal  things. 
The  church  is  as  much  an  entity  as  the  state  is. 
It  is  as  much  a  permanent  interest,  as  much  a  fun- 
damental organism,  as  the  state  is.  It  is  as  much 
needed  as  the  state.  A  good  religion  is  as  proper 
to  man  as  a  good  government. 

And  what  connects  the  successive  generations 
with  the  institutions  of  the  past  is,  primarily,  birth. 
Let  us  suppose  this  were  not  the  case.  Let  us 
suppose  the  children  of  the  country  to  which  I  have 
referred,  —  or  rather,  to  bring  the  matter  nearer  home, 
let  us  suppose  the  children  of  those  who  adopted  the 
Constitution  of  this  country  in  1784,  —  that  these 
children,  I  say,  in  virtue  of  birth,  as  being  children, 
held  no  sort  of  relation  of  duty,  service,  or  interest,  to 
that  Constitution.     Why,  that  Constitution  and  the 

6* 


bb  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

union  of  these  States  would  end,  would  be  annihi- 
lated, with  the  death  of  those  who  first  adopted  it, 
and  the  next  generation  would  be  left  all  afloat,  with- 
out a  government,  without  laws,  without  a  country, 
without  unity.  If  the  rule  of  descent  does  not  hold, 
*  the  link  is  broken  that  connects  one  age  with  another, 
and  the  institutions  of  the  past  with  the  future.  The 
extant  generation  of  the  people  of  this  country 
must  either  live  without  a  government,  or  go  on  to 
form  a  new  one,  or  split  into  a  thousand  govern- 
ments, each  of  which  shall  last  during  the  lifetime 
of  its  founders  only,  unless  this  hereditary  principle 
be  a  good  one. 

But  to  turn  back  to  that  imaginary  land.  The 
fathers  die,  the  state  does  not  die  ;  it  is  perpetuated 
in  their  children.  Neither  does  the  church  die ; 
that,  likewise,  is  perpetuated  in  the  children.  The 
children  are  bound  to  take  up  the  church  when  their 
fathers  leave  it,  just  as  much  as  they  are  to  maintain 
the  state,  and  carry  it  on. 

This  is  clear,  my  friends,  is  it  not  ?  All  the  peo- 
ple owe  obligation  to  that  state,  do  they  not?  And 
do  not  all  the  people  owe  obligation  to  that  church  ? 
And  does  not  this  obligation  both  to  church  and 
state  continue  through  all  generations,  that  is,  so 
long  as  the  state  and  the  church  continue  ? 

Have  I  not,  my  friends,  pointed  out  the  fundamen- 
tal ground  of  obligation  to  the  church  ?  Have  I  not 
elicited  the  correct  principle  of  the  thing  ?  Is  there 
one  in  this  assembly  who  thinks  I  have  not  stated  it 
right  ?  Is  there  one  who  sees  any  considerable 
weakness  in  the  case   I  have  undertaken  to  make 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  67 

out?  Of  course,  I  speak  in  an  abstract  and  general 
manner,  and  without  reference  to  local  or  temporary 
exceptions. 

As  regards  that  country,  you  may  say  persons 
coming  to  reside  in  it  from  abroad,  from  other  na- 
tions, are  not  admitted  to  the  state,  or  to  the  privi- 
lege of  citizenship,  without  probation.  True  ;  but 
the  probation  ends  with  them.  The  children  of  these 
naturalized  parents  fall  into  the  general  flow  of 
things,  and  become,  like  all  the  rest,  members  by 
birth.  Thus,  in  these  United  States,  an  Englishman 
must  wait  five  years,  I  think,  before  he  can  become 
to  all  intents  an  American,  or  a  citizen  of  the  repub- 
lic. But  the  Church,  the  true  Church,  is  more  uni- 
versal than  any  existing  state  is.  There  is  no  re- 
public of  nations,  there  is  no  community  of  repub- 
lics. If  there  were,  this  law"  of  naturalization  would 
be  greatly  modified.  As  it  is,  England  being  a  mon- 
archy, there  would  seem  to  be  a  propriety  in  allowing 
its  people  who  come  here  time  to  become  republi- 
cans. But  the  true  Church  is  one  in  all  parts  of  the 
world.  Of  course,  the  Church  of  England,  the  vari- 
ous Trinitarian  churches  in  this  country,  however 
much  truth  they  may  embody,  are  not  to  us  the  true 
Church.  But  taking  the  Unitarian  Church  to  be  the 
true  Church,  I  say  it  is  one  in  all  parts  of  the  world. 

Let  me  ask  a  moment's  attention  to  this  word 
naturalization.  It  is  a  singular  word,  perhaps  a 
strong  word,  a  term  of  political  economy.  It  means 
that  a  foreigner  becomes  a  natural  citizen  ;  he  is  in- 
natured,  so  to  say,  to  the  country  he  joins  ;  he  be- 
comes the  same  as  a  natural-horn  citizen,  and  his 


68  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

children  hy  birth  become  citizens.  Herein  is  involved 
the  central  idea  of  this  discourse,  that  a  man  is  a  cit- 
izen by  nature^  that  he  is  a  member  of  the  state  by- 
nature,  in  other  words,  as  we  have  used  the  phrase, 
by  birth.  That  is,  this  naturalization  is  simply  taking 
a  man  out  of  foreignness,  out  of  an  exotic  condition, 
and  making  him  indigenous  to  the  new  soil,  making 
this  his  natural  place,  restoring  him  to  a  condition 
of  nature  here.  To  his  children,  even  as  to  seeds 
that  drop  from  a  transplanted  tree,  this  becomes  their 
native  soil ;  they  grow  up  on  the  same  earth  where 
their  parents  last  lived,  they  bloom  beneath  the  same 
sky,  they  are  obedient  to  the  same  laws. 

This  is  naturalization.  And  here  I  am  reminded, 
frequently  and  sadly  reminded,  of  what  our  Saviour 
said  ;  that  the  children  of  this  world  are  wiser  in 
their  generation  than  the  children  of  light.  As  to 
certain  of  these  things  in  the  state  to  which  I  have 
referred,  men  have  gone  straight  forward,  and  acted 
in  a  rational  and  common-sense  way  ;  but  in  mat- 
ters of  the  Church  they  have  bungled  shockingly.  It 
is  nowhere  distinctly  decreed,  indeed,  in  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States,  that  the  rule  of  succes- 
sion to  the  rights,  duties,  and  privileges  of  citizen- 
ship shall  be  just  as  I  have  stated,  by  birth.  Yet 
this  is  the  great  principle  that  underlies  our  country, 
our  history,  our  laws,  our  entire  being  as  a  nation. 

I  appeal  to  legal  gentlemen  before  me  if  it  is  not 
so.  And  if  these  legal  gentlemen  are  so  wise  in 
their  own  affairs,  why  will  they  not  help  us  in  ours? 
Why  will  they  not  throw  some  light  on  the  darkness 
of  us  ministers,  who  are  supposed  to  represent  the 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  69 

children  of  light  ?  For  of  a  truth  this  whole  church 
matter  is  in  Egyptian  darkness.  As  regards  the 
state,  birth  constitutes  the  prime  law  of  relation  to 
it.  Even  naturalization  is  no  exception  to  this  rule, 
since  it  only  indicates  an  attempt  to  bring  all  such 
residents  as  happen  not  to  be  born  here,  into  this 
birth  condition.  My  conclusion  is,  that  really,  in 
any  true  idea  of  the  Church,  in  the  actual  condition 
of  any  true  Church,  birth  constitutes  a  ground  of  re- 
lation to  it. 

Does  history  or  experience  throw  any  light  on  this 
subject?  This  principle  is  not  only  implied,  it  is 
distinctly  asserted,  in  the  Jewish  economy.  The  orig- 
inal covenant  with  Abraham  was  to  him  and  his 
seed  for  ever.  And  this  is  the  key  to  all  the  subse- 
quent history  of  the  Jews.  So  Moses  uses  this  strik- 
ing and  most  appropriate  language  :  "  Now  these  are 
the  commandments,  the  statutes,  and  the  judgments 
which  the  Lord  your  God  commanded  to  teach  you, 
that  ye  might  do  them  in  the  land  whither  ye  go  to 
possess  it :  that  thou  mightest  fear  the  Lord  thy  God, 
to  keep  all  his  statutes  and  his  commandments  which 
I  command  thee  ;  thou,  and  thy  son,  and  thy  son's  son, 
all  the  days  of  thy  life,"  —  i.  e.  all  the  years  of  thine 
existence  as  a  nation.  The  rule  of  circumcision  is  ex- 
plicit: "  He  that  is  eight  days  old  shall  be  circumcised 
amongst  you,  every  man-child  in  your  generations, 
he  that  is  born  in  the  house."  When  the  law  was 
publicly  proclaimed,  they  were  directed  to  "  gather  the 
people  together,  men  and  women  and  children,  that 
they  might  hear  and  learn,  and  that  their  children 
which  had  not  known   any  thing  might  hear  and 


70  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

learn  to  fear  the  Lord."  So  of  particular  rites  and 
ordinances,  as  the  Feast  of  the  Passover,  and  the 
Tabernacles  ;  these  were  to  be  kept  by  the  Israel- 
ites and  their  children  through  all  generations.  In 
other  words,  Judaism,  in  all  its  extent  and  import, 
established  and  perpetuated  itself  on  the  basis  of 
propagation. 

Will  it  be  said  that,  among  that  ancient  people, 
Church  and  State  were  one  ?  What  difference  does 
that  make  ?  Even  if  these  become  separate,  as  with 
us,  how  does  the  principle  of  continuity  by  birth  fail, 
or  hold  in  one  case  more  than  the  other  ?  This  rule 
does  apply  to  the  State  of  these  times,  why  should 
it  not  to  the  Church  ? 

I  turn  to  the  primitive  Christian  era,  —  when  a 
Church  was  formed,  so  to  say,  without  any  State  ; 
when  in  the  midst  of  corrupt  and  wicked  nations  a 
new  element  of  spiritual  life  developed  itself,  and  a 
community  arose  containing  within  its  bosom  the 
germs  of  both  Church  and  State,  but  of  a  much  purer 
type ;  and  in  those  times,  I  shall  contend,  the  principle 
to  which  I  have  adverted  prevailed.  I  shall  stand 
on  this,  until  evidence  to  the  contrary,  of  the  exist- 
ence of  which  I  am  ignorant,  shall  be  produced.  In- 
deed, I  shall  insist  that  this  idea  of  natural  perpetua- 
tion, or  perpetuation  by  birth,  was  transferred,  bodily, 
from  Judaism  to  Christianity.  It  underlies  the  whole 
Gospel  system.  Christ  could  have  had  no  other  ex- 
pectation than  that  his  kingdom  was  to  descend  from 
father  to  son  through  all  generations.  So  Christ 
called  the  little  children  to  him  and  blessed  them,  as 
if,  at  the  very  earliest  possible  point,  to  win  and  ini- 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  71 

tiate  them  to  the  coming  dispensation.  So  Peter 
says,  "  The  promise  is  unto  you,  and  to  your  chil- 
dren." So  Paul  calls  us  the  spiritual  seed  of  Abra- 
ham. Young  Christian  women  are  to  love  their 
husbands  and  their  children.  Children  are  to  obey 
their  parents  in  the  Lord.  John  rejoices  that  the 
little  children  are  walking  in  the  truth.  Paul  ex- 
pressly argues  that  Christianity  is  thus  continuous, 
in  order  that  the  promise  may  be  sure  to  all  the  seed. 
There  is  the  remarkable  passage  (1  Cor.  vii.  14)  where 
Paul,  alluding  to  the  question  whether  a  Christian 
might  marry  a  heathen,  says,  if  two  persons  are  so 
married,  let  them  not  separate,  —  "  for  the  unbeliev- 
ing husband  is  sanctified  by  the  wife,  and  the  un- 
believing wife  is  sanctified  by  the  husband ;  else 
were  your  children  unclean  ;  but  now  are  they  holy." 
"  Already,"  says  Dr.  Neander,  commenting  on  this 
passage,  "  the  children  of  Christians  were  distin- 
guished from  the  children  of  heathen,  and  might  be 
considered  as  belonging  to  the  Church."  "  We  have 
here,"  he  adds,  "  an  indication  of  the  preeminence 
belonging  to  children  born  in  a  Christian  commu- 
nity." 

Am  I  mistaken  in  saying  that  the  original  Chris- 
tian Church  could  have  contemplated  nothing  else 
than  that  the  Church  of  the  fathers  would  be- 
come the  Church  of  the  children,  to  the  end  of  all 
things?  Or  are  we  in  this  taking  some  things  for 
granted  which  do  not  exist?  Are  we  begging  the 
question  ?  I  mean,  is  the  Church,  like  the  State,  like 
the  family,  to  be  considered  one  of  the  permanent 
and  comprehensive  institutions  of  the  race  ?     I  have 


72  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

supposed  it  was  so.  I  have  argued  on  that  suppo- 
sition. Is  there  any  mistake  here?  Was  the  Church 
designed  for  one  age  ?  Was  it  ever  designed  for  a 
limited  class  of  human  beings?  Is  the  Church  to  be 
considered  like  a  committee  of  arrangements  got  up 
for  an  occasion,  and  expiring  when  the  occasion 
ends  ?  Is  the  Church  like  a  copartnership,  that  ends 
with  the  death  of  its  members,  or  may  be  terminated 
at  any  moment  by  dissolution  ? 

I  will  further  illustrate  my  point  by  putting  it  in 
this  light;  that  as  things  are,  even  in  our  most  erro- 
neous parishes,  the  Church  has,  as  it  were  by  nature, 
as  it  were  on  this  simple,  basis  of  birth-relation,  a 
good  deal  to  do  with  you,  with  each  one  of  the  peo- 
ple, with  men,  women,  and  children  indiscriminately  ; 
and  out  of  this  I  shall  argue  that  you  all  indiscrim- 
inately have  a  certain  vital,  natural  birth-relation  to 
the  Church.  For  instance,  the  Church  through  its 
pastors  visits  all  your  families,  saints  and  sinners ; 
it  marries  you  ;  it  buries  you ;  it  invites  you  all  to 
its  sanctuary  ;  it  preaches  to  you,  prays  for  you,  pro- 
nounces its  benedictions  on  you  all ;  it  has  its  direc- 
tions, its  consolations,  its  admonitions,  its  helps  for 
you  all,  without  respect  of  persons.  You  have  the 
Bible,  the  Church  constitution  and  laws,  in  all  your 
houses.  Your  children  attend  the  Church  Sunday 
schools.  The  Church,  so  to  say,  gives  the  Sabbath 
to  you  all  ahke,  and  you  all  suspend  your  secular  busi- 
ness on  that  day.  More ;  as  I  showed  a  while  since, 
the  Church  asks  your  aid,  for  its  meeting-houses,  for 
the  pay  of  its  ministers,  and  for  its  various  benevo- 
lent objects.     Now  what  is  it  that  brings  this  church, 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  73 

or  me,  its  pastor,  into  this  near  personal  connection 
with  you  all  ?  It  is  this  of  which  I  speak,  nature, 
birth.  I  mean,  that  as  this  church  has  had  connec- 
tion with  the  parents,  so  it  has  connection  with  the 
children,  because  they  are  your  children.  Whatever 
tie  binds  you  to  the  Church  or  its  minister  becomes 
a  tie  of  nature  in  your  children,  and  will  continue  a 
birth-tie  in  your  children's  children.  I  am  called  to 
bury  a  child.  Why  ?  Why  not  somebody  else,  why 
anybody  ?  For  the  simple  reason  that  you  have  a 
certain  connection  with  the  Church,  and  the  child  is 
your  child,  and  I  am  pastor  of  it,  because  it  is  your 
child. 

In  many  places  a  minister,  that  is,  an  officer  of  the 
Church,  formerly  would  not,  in  many  places  now 
such  a  man  will  not,  bury  an  unbaptized  child  ;  be- 
cause it  did  not  belong  to  the  Church,  and  the  Church 
could  take  no  cognizance  of  it,  and  it  could  not  be 
admitted  into  consecrated,  that  is.  Church  burying- 
ground ;  and  unshriven,  unblest,  it  was  sent  to 
moulder  in  the  desert.  But  Protestant  ingenuity 
has  contrived  a  way  to  avoid  this  shamelessness ; 
our  ministers  will  go  to  work  in  a  common-sense 
way,  and  bury  such  children,  while  at  the  same  time 
they  waive  all  allusion  to  the  Church  which  in  reali- 
ty employs  them.  So,  too,  they  would  not  marry 
unbaptized  persons ;  and  would  not  now,  save  that 
our  secular  rulers,  wiser  in  their  generation  than  the 
heads  of  the  Church,  have  so  managed  matters  as  to 
take  this  affair  of  marriage  wholly  out  of  ecclesias- 
tical control,  and  hence  by  a  sort  of  necessity  the 


74  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

clergy  I  refer  to  are  driven  to  compromise  their 
ground  somewhat. 

Well,  if  I,  if  this- church,  of  which  I  am  pastor, 
holds  this  important  and  responsible  relation  to  you, 
you  all  hold  an  important  and  responsible  relation  to 
me  and  the  Church.  As  the  President  of  the  United 
States  holds  an  important  relation  to  all  the  people 
of  the  land,  so  do  I,  your  pastor,  to  all  the  people  of 
this  parish.  And  as  all  the  people  of  the  Union  hold 
a  certain  important  and  natural  relation  to  the  Pres- 
ident, and  to  the  government  he  represents,  so  also 
do  all  the  people  of  the  parish  hold  an  important  and 
natural  relation  to  me,  the  pastor,  and  to  the  Church 
which  I  represent.  As  the  people  of  the  United 
States,  in  their  successive  generations,  are  born  into 
these  important  relations  to  the  State,  so  are  these 
parishioners,  in  their  successive  generations,  born 
into  important  relations  to  the  Church. 

There  is  involved  here  a  plain  principle  of  recipro- 
city. If  I  hold  a  religious  relation  to  you,  you  hold 
a  religious  relation  to  me ;  if  I  am  your  Christian 
preacher,  you  are  my  Christian  hearers ;  if  I  am  un- 
der church  obligations  to  you,  you  are  under  church 
obligations  to  me.  Will  any  reply,  that  neither 
they  nor  their  fathers  were  technical  members  of  the 
Church,  and  therefore  the  principle  we  have  been  un- 
folding does  not  apply  to  them  or  their  children  ?  But 
you  are  church-goers,  church-w^orshippers,  church- 
supporters  ;  you  have  come  yourselves,  and  brought 
your  families  here,  for  months  and  years ;  you  con- 
sider me,  the  pastor  of  this  church,  beholden  to  you 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  75 

and  your  families,  and  on  the  principle  of  reciprocity 
you  are  in  like  manner  beholden  to  me  and  the  Church. 
But  more  than  this.  On  the  principle  of  naturali- 
zation, which  the  world  happily  furnishes  us,  you 
are  brought  into  intimate  relations  to  the  Church. 
Granting  that  your  parents  were  not  church-mem- 
bers ;  granting  that  you,  before  you  came  hither, 
attended  no  church ;  your  very  coming  here,  and 
being  here,  and  staying  here,  naturalizes  you  to  this 
church.  I  grant  we  have  prescribed  no  term  or 
method  of  probation  ;  only  I  say  this,  that  any  man 
or  family  that  truly  worships  here,  belongs  here ; 
any  one  that  awakens  in  behalf  of  himself  or  his 
family  a  pastoral  and  church  interest,  is  so  far  obli- 
gated to  the  pastor  and  the  Church.  As  regards  a 
great  multitude  who  consider  themselves  in  a  sense 
aliens  and  foreigners  to  the  Church,  they  connect 
themselves  with  it  by  naturalization  ;  and  this  covers 
the  whole  ground,  —  covers  it  not  only  for  them- 
selves, but  their  posterity  after  them. 

Some  have  a  notion  they  are  only  connected  with 
the  Society.  A  man  the  other  day  told  me,  he  had 
indeed  paid  something  to  the  Society,  but  that  he 
did  not  belong  to  the  Church  ;  and  clearly  intimated 
that  he  was  under  no  sort  of  obligation  either  to 
the  Church  or  the  pastor.  I  am  not,  in  any  high 
and  proper  sense  of  the  term,  pastor  of  a  society. 
The  Society  is  a  thing  of  the  law;  the  law  makes 
and  unmakes  societies ;  the  law  of  the  Society  has 
changed  many  times  in  this  country.  I  am  pastor 
of  a  church;  was  ordained  over  a  church.  The 
Society,  as  a    legal  entity^   I  have  had   nothing  to 


76  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

do  with ;  I  never  attended  one  of  their  meetings ;  I 
know  not  that  I  ever  looked  into  its  book  of  records. 
So  that,  really,  I  have  little  or  nothing  to  do  with 
the  Society.  Here,  indeed,  may  be  some  interesting 
questions,  not  as  yet  settled,  which  I  shall  not  now 
enter  upon.  Now,  when  men  who  have  been  here 
year  after  year,  with  their  families,  and  have  involved 
me  in  intimate  relations  with  themselves  and  fami- 
lies, turn  round  and  say  that  they  have  only  had  a 
certain  connection  with  the  Society,  and  clearly 
imply  that  they  are  under  no  sort  of  obligations  to 
this  Church  of  Christ,  or  to  me,  its  pastor,  what  do 
such  things  mean  ?  We  are  all  at  loose  ends  on 
this  subject.  It  is  in  the  hope  of  being  able  to  do 
something  toward  setting  us  right,  that  I  say  what 
I  have,  and  perhaps  weary  you  with  topics  of  this 
sort. 

I  hold  this  for  self-evident,  that,  in  a  Christian  com- 
munity, the  people  hold  important  relations  to  Chris- 
tianity ;  that  in  a  community  of  churches,  in  other 
words,  in  a  Church  community,  a  Christian  Church 
community,  they  hold  important  relations  to  the 
Church.  For  instance,  that  here  in  New  England, 
here  on  New  England  soil,  the  people  here,  all  of 
them,  old  and  young,  hold  as  vital  connection  with 
our  Christian  Church  here,  as  they  do  with  the  politi- 
cal State  here ;  and  if  the  Church  here  is  under  any 
sort  of  obligation  to  labor  for,  pray  for,  bless  a  single 
man,  that  man  is  under  equal  obligation  to  love  and 
cherish  the  Church.  If  a  man  has  merely  a  financial 
connection  with  the  Society  and  has  no  obligations 
to  the  Church  or  its   pastor,  —  no  moral,  religious, 


BIRTH-RELATION  ^TO    THE    CHURCH.  77 

high  obligations,  —  then  the  Church  has  no  obliga- 
tions to  him.  On  common  principles  of  justice,  he 
cannot  expect  the  pastor  to  do  any  thing  for  him,  or 
his  family  ;  if  he  is  sick,  he  cannot  expect  the  pas- 
tor to  visit  him ;  if  he  should  die,  he  cannot  expect 
the  pastor  to  bury  him.  Indeed,  he  has  no  pastor, 
no  church. 

Will  you  say  that,  by  pressing  the  analogy  between 
the  State  and  the  Church,  I  must  needs  imply  a  na- 
tional religion,  as  we  have  a  national  government  ? 
"We  have  in  an  important  sense  a  national  relig- 
ion, we  are  called  a  Christian  nation,  we  are  part 
of  Christendom.  I  wish  we  had  more  national  re- 
ligion, I  do  not  want  to  see  a  national  creed.  How- 
ever, it  is  granted  that,  as  a  people,  we  are  divided 
on  theological  subjects.  There  are  Jews  amongst 
us,  and  Mormons,  and  all  kinds  of  notions.  But 
suppose  the  worst.  Suppose  there  were  but  one 
true  Church  in  the  land,  and  that  this  assembly, 
gathered  in  these  walls,  were  it;  the  case  would  not 
be  altered,  the  argument  would  be  the  same.  We 
who  are  assembled  here  would  all  be  beholden  to 
that  Church,  we  and  our  children  after  us  for  ever. 
Inasmuch  as,  in  virtue  of  being  born,  or  living  here, 
you  belong  to  the  State,  so  in  the  case  supposed 
would  you  in  a  sense  belong  to  the  Church,  even  if 
there  were  no  other  church  in  the  land. 

But  you  say,  even  if  all  persons  in  a  sense  belong 
to  the  State,  they  are  not  allowed  the  highest  privi- 
leges of  citizenship  till  they  are  twenty-one  years  of 
age,  and  they  cannot  fill  certain  offices  till  they  are 
older  than  that.  True,  but  they  enjoy  a  multitude 
7* 


78  birth-relation' TO    THE    CHURCH. 

of  state  privileges  before  that  period.  Every  one, 
at  birth,  shares  and  enjoys  the  protection  of  the  laws 
and  care  of  government.  Every  child  has  the  privi- 
lege of  schools,  of  the  highway,  of  support,  —  of  a 
thousand  things.  A  babe  that  shall  be  afloat  on  the 
wide  sea,  a  thousand  leagues  away,  is  still  under 
protection  of  the  flag  that  symbolizes  the  nation. 
In  many  of  the  old  churches,  custom,  if  not  canon, 
prescribed  an  age  when  persons  should  begin  to 
commune,  that  is,  be  admitted  to  the  highest  privi- 
leges of  church-membership.  In  England  this  age 
is  sixteen  years.  In  that  country  a  particular  age  is 
prescribed  also  as  necessary  to  the  holding  of  various 
offices  of  the  Church.  There  is  no  more  difficulty 
in  respect  of  the  Church  than  of  the  State.  Even 
here  in  New  England,  while  our  platforms  are  silent 
on  the  subject,  universal  custom,  as  well  as  common 
sense,  without  fixing  upon  the  precise  age  a  man 
must  reach,  always  requires  a  certain  maturity  of 
mind  and  heart  in  those  who  would  exercise  ecclesi- 
astical functions. 

In  this  analogy  between  the  State  and  the  Church, 
we  come  to  another  interesting  and  important  point. 
You  say  that  all  are  not  citizens,  that  some  have 
forfeited  their  state  rights,  that  for  crimes  and  mis- 
demeanors they  are  shut  in  prisons.  Will  you  ob- 
serve this,  —  that  every  man  is  presumed  to  be  a 
worthy  citizen  until  by  competent  tribunals  he  is 
proved  to  be  a  wicked  man  ;  that  the  normal,  natu- 
ral, birth  condition  of  every  man  is  citizenship ;  and 
that  any  change  in  that  relation  is  an  after  affair,  a 
superinduced  and  artificial  event  ?     But  the  point  is 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  79 

this.  As  the  State  has  the  power  of  punishment, 
so  the  Church  has  the  power  of  discipline ;  a  power 
given  by  Christ,  often  exercised,  too  often  abused  ;  — 
but  she  has  the  power.  As  the  State  can  outlaw  or 
attaint,  so  the  Church  can  excommunicate.  You 
see  what  the  State  does  in  assuming  that  every  man 
belongs  to  it,  except  on  the  condition  above  stated. 
Has  not  the  Church  as  good  a  right,  is  not  the 
Church  of  consequence  enough,  holds  it  not  suffi- 
cient breadth  of  place  in  the  permanent  interests  of 
this  world,  is  it  not  imperatively  bound,  to  consider 
all  men  in  a  certain  sense  connected  with  it,  until 
by  an  overt  act  of  wrong-doing  they  become  liable 
to  its  censures,  or  provoke  its  penalties  ?  Popular 
usage,  as  you  well  know,  reverses  every  thing;  it 
presumes  nobody  to  belong  to  the  Church,  or  to  have 
any  thing  to  do  with  it,  until  by  some  special  act 
in  after  life  they  render  themselves  proper  candidates 
for  its  favor ;  —  thus,  in  a  Christian  community,  in  all 
our  Christian  congregations,  virtually  unchurching 
the  great  majority,  excommunicating  our  wives  and 
little  ones,  actually  damning  the  infant  at  its  sainted 
mother's  breast. 

There  are  in  all  communities  recusants  both  to 
Church  and  State,  commonly  known  as  Come- 
outers ;  we  have  them  in  this  country.  All  I  have 
to  say  about  them  is,  the  Church  can  get  along  with 
them  as  well  as  the  State.  The  best  way,  perhaps, 
is  to  let  them  alone.  Let  the  Church  reach  and 
bless  them  if  it  can.  Yet  in  many  instances  that 
which  calls  itself  the  Church  has  so  conducted,  I 
do   not  much  wonder  men   leave  it.      Their  duty 


80  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

in  the  case,  however,  would  seem  to  be  to  revive  and 
perpetuate  a  true  church  form  and  feeling  among 
themselves.  Of  course  I  need  not  say,  jf  the  Church 
or  the  State  does  wrong,  sins  against  God,  and  vio- 
lates human  conscience,  no  man  is  bound  to  obey 
or  to  regard  it. 

Will  you  remark  some  singular  results  ?  In  a 
town  not  a  thousand  miles  from  here,  where  is 
what  is  called  a  society,  a  meeting-house,  a  Sun- 
day school.  Sabbath  services,  for  the  most  of  the 
time  a  preacher,  an  organ,  a  choir,  I  was  told  by  one 
of  the  parties  interested,  they  were  not  a  church. 
A  religious  society  without  a  church !  I  have  heard 
of  a  state  without  a  king,  a  church  without  a  bishop  ; 
but  it  was  reserved  for  the  present  time,  so  fertile  in 
improvement  and  invention,  to  produce  a  religious 
society  without  a  church.  Again,  it  has  happened 
during  the  religious  controversies  that  have  agitated 
New  England,  that  the  entire  body  of  so  called 
church-members,  with  their  minister,  have  with- 
drawn from  a  given  parish,  while  the  majority  of  the 
people  from  conscience'  sake  remained.  The  ques- 
tion I  would  ask  is.  Did  no  church  of  Christ  re- 
main ?  Sometimes  the  non-communicants  have 
themselves  gone  off  and  built  up,  I  was  going  to 
say,  a  church  of  their  own.  Did  they  not  become  a 
church  of  Christ,  —  that  in  which,  as  we  believe,  was 
all  truth,  all  evangelical  doctrine  ? 

My  friends,  we  are  in  a  position  happily,  provi- 
dentially adapted  to  rectify  the  errors  of  the  past; 
at  least  for  ourselves,  and  our  children  after  us. 
We  reject  the  dogma  of  total  depravity,  we  reject 


BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH.  81 

the  fable  of  regenerative  baptism,  which  was  in- 
vented to  heal  what  the  other  destroyed.  We  admit 
baptism,  and  do  not  at  the  same  time  cast  off  the 
baptized  ones.  We  believe  at  least  in  the  inno- 
cence of  the  babe ;  we  believe  at  least  that  the  child 
has  a  susceptibility  of  goodness,  and  of  the  Chris- 
tian life ;  and  we  see  in  baptism  a  seal  of  the  cove- 
nant which  God  would  make  with  us  and  ours  for 
ever.  We  recognize,  too,  the  higher  privilege  of  the 
Holy  Communion.  And  is  there  any  thing  to  hin- 
der us  and  all  Liberal  Christians  from  taking  that 
stand  which  God  would  have  his  Church  adopt? 
Will  not  these  adults  feel,  will  they  not  go  on  to  feel, 
that,  as  it  were  by  a  species  of  naturalization,  they 
sustain  vital,  interesting,  solemn  relations  to  the 
Church  ?  Will  you  not  educate,  train  your  children 
to  feel  that  they,  hy  birth,  because  they  are  your 
children,  likewise  hold  these  most  affecting  relations 
to  sacred  things,  and  are  growing  up  members  of 
Christ  and  of  one  another  ?  Will  any  man  of  you 
ever  again  tell  me  he  has  no  obligations  to  the 
Church  ? 

Like  the  genius  of  a  departed  faith,  I  stand 
here  in  the  midst  of  the  desolations  which  for  ages 
have  been  sweeping  over  the  world,  the  desolations 
of  error  and  superstition,  bigotry  and  craft,  that 
have  swept  over  the  Zion  of  New  England;  I  stand 
in  the  midst  of  men  who  have  grown  cold,  selfish, 
and  indifferent  to  every  thing  relating  to  the  Church  ; 
in  the  midst  of  dark  and  forbidding  influences,  sur- 
rounded by  the  monuments  of  deserted  truth,  I 
stand  here  to  appeal  to  you,  to  lift  my  voice  in  the 


82  BIRTH-RELATION    TO    THE    CHURCH. 

midst  of  the  desolations,  and  beg  and  plead  with 
you,  that  the  Church  of  God  may  have  a  place  in 
your  hearts.  I  ask  that  an  attachment  to  it  may  be 
revived,  or  created,  in  your  souls. 


SERMON    VI 


THE    CHURCH,  ILLUSTRATED   BY    THE   EAMILY  AND 
THE   STATE. 

I  SPEAK  CONCERXIXG  THE  CHURCH. —  Ephesians  V.  32. 

There  are  three  great  enduring  and  divine  or- 
ganizations of  men,  or,  if  you  please,  social  relations 
of  human  beings,  the  Family,  the  State,  the  Church. 
I  call  them  enduring,  because  as  long  as  man  lasts 
on  the  earth  they  will  last ;  I  call  them  divine,  be- 
cause they  have  their  foundation  in  the  will  of  God. 
I  might  with  equal  truth  say  they  have  their  founda- 
tion in  nature,  but  this  would  be  a  tautological  ex- 
pression, since  nature  is  of  God's  ordaining  and  the 
creature  of  his  power.  I  am  aware  of  discussions 
that  proceed  on  the  hypothesis  of  man  as  a  pure  in- 
dividual or  solitary  being.  Sometimes  we  hear  the 
expression,  man  in  a  state  of  nature.  But,  for  all 
practical  purposes,  man  never  is  a  purely  individual 
or  solitary  being.  He  always  is  in  society,  and,  if 
you  please,  out  of  a  state  of  nature ;  not  a  felicitous 
phrase,  I  allow,  since  nothing  is  more  unnatural  than 
the  solitary  state.  At  least  the  great  mass  of  those 
of  whom  this  discourse  speaks,  and  to  whom  it  refers, 


84  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

are  to  be  considered  in  this  light.  An  infant  is  in 
society,  most  helplessly,  most  pitiably  so.  It  is  in 
the  family.  Birth  implies  society.  All  human  be- 
ings around  me  exist  in  some  form  of  society.  Man 
is  social  in  his  nature,  and  ever  tends  to  some  mode 
of  assembly,  aggregation,  or  whatever  we  may  call  it. 
Man  is  not  complete,  not  developed,  not  perfected, 
except  in  mutual  relation  with  his  fellows.  An  ex- 
ample of  purest  individuality  or  extreme  solitariness 
of  a  voluntary  sort,  may  be  found  in  the  species  of 
monks  called  anchorites  and  hermits.  An  instance 
of  an  involuntary  sort  is  seen  in  persons  condemned 
to  the  solitude  of  a  prison.  We  conceive  both  of 
these  cases  to  be  departures  from  the  great  law  of 
humanity. 

Well,  since  men  must  come  together,  what  are  the 
leading  modes  of  that  union  ?  We  have  said  these 
are  three,  the  Family,  the  State,  the  Church.  At 
the  basis  of  these  lie  three  leading  ideas  or  senti- 
ments :  religion,  which  expresses  our  relation  to 
God  ;  morality,  which  expresses  our  relation  to  our 
fellow-beings  in  general;  conjugal  affection,  which 
unites  the  human  race  in  pairs.  These  organiza- 
tions and  these  ideas  are  prime,  fundamental,  and 
universal.  In  all  parts  of  the  world,  in  every  age, 
among  all  races,  you  will  find  men  uniting  on  these 
forms.  Man  eternally  tends  to  the  infinite,  which  is 
religion ;  he  eternally  tends  to  an  intercourse  deter- 
mined by  geographic,  or  lingual,  or  other  affinities, 
which  is  politics;  man  and  woman  eternally  tend 
together,  which  is  love.  That  is,  there  is  no  people 
without  a  Family,  a  State,  and  a  Church ;  albeit  in 
many  instances  the  forms  of  these  things  are  very 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  85 

rude  and  the  point  of  junction  very  dimly  defined. 
At  least,  in  proportion  as  man  advances  in  civiliza- 
tion, the  more  entirely  and  distinctly  are  these  affin- 
ities made  manifest.  Yet  I  can  hardly  recall  even  a 
savage  tribe  that  does  not,  either  by  priesthood  or  rit- 
ual, by  altar  or  worship,  express  its  relation  to  God. 
I  am  aware  that  I  use  the  term  Church  in  rather 
a  wide  sense.  I  do  not  mean  by  it  the  Christian 
Church  alone.  We  often  hear  the  expression,  the 
Jewish  Church.  There  is  also  the  Mohammedan 
Church.  So  everywhere  is  that,  which,  organically, 
expresses  a  people's  relation  to  its  God.  A  term, 
again,  that  expresses  the  idea  of  State  is  Politics,  or 
we  say  men  unite  for  political  purposes.  A  syno- 
nyme  for  State,  very  nearly,  is  Government,  Country, 
Empire.  Different  forms  of  states  or  governments  are 
monarchies,  republics,  and  all  the  intermediate  shades 
of  civil  polity.  The  object  of  government,  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  Constitution  of  Maine,  is  to  establish 
justice,  insure  tranquillity,  provide  for  our  mutual  de- 
fence, promote  the  common  welfare,  and  secure  the 
blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity. 
People  unite  in  the  Church  for  religious  purposes, 
to  cultivate  their  higher  natures,  and  sanctify  them- 
selves before  the  Lord  their  God.  There  is  hardly  a 
good  synonyme  for  Church ;  we  sometimes  borrow 
the  Jewish  phrase  Zion  ;  in  our  vernacular  we  have 
a  rude  way  of  expressing  it,  by  the  words  meeting, 
meeting-house.  There  is  the  Christian  Church, 
wherein  people  unite  for  Christian  and  religious 
purposes  ;  or  for  religious  purposes  as  modified  by 
Christ.     It  is  of  this  that  I  now  speak,  and  when 


86  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

I  use  the  word  religious^  it  will  be  in  the  sense  of 
Christian-religious. 

We  denote  the  Family  sometimes  by  the  words 
house,  household,  domestic  relations,  conjugal  tie, 
and  the  like.  There  is  a  word  that  expresses  the 
deep  thing  which  the  Family  is  to  us,  that  is,  home. 
The  Family  continues  the  race  on  the  earth,  in  it 
are  nurtured  some  of  our  deepest  affections,  to  it 
evermore  gravitate  the  hearts  and  the  loves  of  all 
well-regulated  minds. 

The  Family  is  holy,  the  State  is  holy,  the  Church 
is  holy.  That  is,  in  their  true  actuality,  they  are  all 
forms  in  which  men  devote  themselves  to  what  is 
agreeable  to  God.  In  other  words,  they  are  all  of 
Divine  appointment. 

In  some  countries,  chiefly  in  such  as  are  monarch- 
ical, there  is  what  is  called  a  union  of  Church  and 
State.  The  king  or  monarch  is  head  of  both.  This 
is  particularly  the  case  in  Russia  and  England.  The 
constitution  of  the  Church  in  those  countries,  like 
that  of  the  State,  is  purely  monarchical.  The  peo- 
ple have  no  more  rights  in  the  one  than  in  the  other. 
In  this  country  there  is  a  separation  of  Church  and 
State ;  and  what  is  noticeable,  while  the  Constitution 
of  our  State  is  republican,  that  of  some  of  our 
churches  is  purely  monarchical ;  as  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic, the  Episcopalian,  and  the  Methodist.  The 
reason  is,  that  these  churches  all  retain  essentially 
the  same  constitution  they  had  before  the  Revolu- 
tipn.  The  people  have  no  rights  in  either  ;  the  peo- 
ple cannot  determine  their  own  creed,  nor  settle 
their  own  minister,  nor  consecrate  their  own  church 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  87 

edifices,  nor  form  their  own  churches.  All  these 
depend,  not  on  the  king  indeed,  but  on  a  power 
above  them,  called  a  prelacy.  Most  of  the  New 
England  Churches,  however,  as  the  Unitarian, 
Universalist,  Baptist,  Swedenborgian,  and  some 
others  of  the  Trinitarian  communion,  have  what 
is  called  a  congregational  constitution,  which  in 
church  matters  means  the  same  as  democratic  in 
state  matters.  The  congregation,  the  people,  rule 
or  determine  their  own  affairs. 

The  law  of  the  Family  is  determined  partly  by 
the  State,  and  partly  by  the  Church.  Its  great  prin- 
ciple is  mutual  love.  The  State  says  what  shall  con- 
stitute marriage,  and  the  Bible  says  how  married  peo- 
•ple  shall  behave.  In  Roman  Catholic  countries,  I  be- 
lieve, the  Church  controls  marriages  altogether.  Yet 
in  general  it  may  be  observed,  the  Family  in  its  essen- 
tial constitution  is  wholly  independent  of  the  State. 

The  State  in  some  regions  is  very  large,  as  Rus- 
sia, China ;  in  others  small,  as  Denmark,  and  some 
of  our  particular  States,  as  Delaware.  The  Family 
consists  essentially  of  two,  husband  and  wife,  and 
directly  and  collaterally  it  enlarges,  but,  as  com- 
pared with  other  organizations,  is  always  small. 
The  State  is  geographically  limited,  the  Family  is 
confined  to  the  house ;  the  Church,  in  its  true  idea, 
is  universal.  Of  particular  churches,  some  are 
large,  some  small. 

Man  tends  evermore  to  society,  we  say;  and  in 
addition  to  these  three  dominant  organizations  are 
others,  smaller  and  secondary.  The  most  interest- 
ing of  these   is  the  school.     This  is  not  essential, 


88  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

like  the  Family,  the  Church,  and  the  State ;  since  it  is 
conceivable  that  the  Family  or  the  Church  should 
educate  the  children.  The  school  is  a  convenience  ; 
families  combine  and  hire  some  one  to  educate  their 
children  in  common.  In  this  country  the  State  says 
families  shall  so  combine.  The  Church  blesses  the 
school.  In  some  countries  the  Church  interferes 
and  directs  the  school.  There  are  other  organiza- 
tions, some  of  business,  which  we  call  companies  or 
incorporations ;  others  of  conviviality,  called  clubs ; 
others  of  pleasure,  that  go  by  various  names,  —  assem- 
blies, parties.  But  none  of  these  secondary  organ- 
izations are  everlasting.  We  spend  only  a  few  days 
at  school,  we  dissolve  our  companies,  we  are  at  a 
party  only  of  an  evening.  We  are  always  in  the 
Family,  in  the  State,  in  the  Church  ;  this  is  a  cardinal 
distinction.  We  are  born  in  the  Family,  and  in 
some  form  continue  in  it  till  we  die.  We  are  born 
in  the  State,  and  are  always  its  subjects,  and  always 
claim  its  protection.  So  we  are  born  into  the  Church, 
and  are  always  members  of  it.  This,  I  mean,  is  the 
true  idea.  Our  relation  to  the  Family,  in  some 
sense,  terminates  at  death,  and  so  does  that  to  the 
State ;  our  Church  connection  continues  beyond  the 
grave.  Or  however  it  may  be  with  these  others,  the 
Church  at  least,  beginning  on  earth,  survives  in 
heaven. 

Next  as  to  the  use  of  words.  The  definition  of 
State,  Government,  Country,  is  political  society,  but 
its  proper  name  is  State,  Government,  Country,  &c. 
The  definition  of  Family  is  married  society,  the  prop- 
er name  is  Family.     So  of  the  Church,  the  definition 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  89 

is  religious  society,  but  this  is  not  its  name.  The 
only  name  for  the  Church  is  the  Church.  All  organ- 
izations, collections,  meeti  ngs  of  men,  are  societies  ; 
but  each  of  the  societies,  of  the  principal  and  univer- 
sal ones  at  least,  has  a  distinct,  or  proper,  or  generic 
name^  as  well  as  a  definition.  So  in  other  things ; 
rose  is  a  kind  of  flower,  brook  is  a  form  of  water, 
but  the  proper  organic  name  is  rose^  brook.  Now 
in  regard  to  every  thing  else  but  the  Church  we  use 
language  properly.  We  never  say,  the  political  so- 
ciety of  Maine  is  large  and  prosperous.  We  say,  the 
State  of  Maine  is  large  and  prosperous.  Yet  when 
we  come  to  speak  of  the  Church,  we  always  use  the 
definition^  and  not  the  name,  and  say,  the  religious 
society,  or  perhaps  more  curtly  still,  the  society,  is 
large  and  prosperous.  A  man  never  says  his  married 
society  is  small,  but  his  family  is  small.  So  we 
say,  the  State,  or,  synonymously,  the  government, 
empire,  of  Great  Britain  is  powerful ;  we  do  not  say, 
the  political  society  of  Great  Britain  is  powerful. 
Country,  again,  expresses  the  deep  sentiment  of  the 
state,  the  nation ;  and  a  man  with  feeling  exclaims, 
O  my  country  !  So  home  expresses  the  deep  senti- 
ment of  the  Family,  and  one  cries  out.  Shall  I  never 
see  my  home  again  ?  As  regards  this  other  thing, 
there  is  nothing  left  but  to  say,  O  my  religious  so- 
ciety !  Society  is  a  terribly  cold  word;  there  is  not 
a  particle  of  warmth  in  it ;  it  is  a  mere  term  of  the 
intellect,  of  philosophy,  or  of  law. 

I  say  these  three  great  everlasting  forms  of  human 
society  all  have  a  name,  a  proper  name ;  but  here  in 
this  community,  and  elsewhere,  we  always  call  two 

8* 


90  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

of  them  by  their  proper  names,  and  the  other  rarely 
or  never;  we  call  it  by  its  definition,  a  thing  almost 
unexampled  in  the  whole  use  of  language.  There  are 
what  we  call,  and  rightly  enough,  societies  ;  as  Tem- 
perance, Tract,  Colonization  Societies.  These  are  not 
the  eternal  forms  of  human  society ;  they  are  tem- 
porary and  special  organizations,  for  which  there  ex- 
ists no  proper  name. 

Now,  as  to  the  use  of  the  word  church  for  the 
place  of  worship  or  building  in  which  a  church 
meets,  it  is  natural,  and  agreeable  to  all  analogy. 
The  word  house  expresses  not  only  a  building  in 
which  a  family  resides,  but  the  family  itself.  There 
are  many  instances  of  this  in  Scripture.  Cornelius 
"  feared  God,  with  all  his  house."  So  city  means  a 
local  place ;  as  one  says,  I  am  going  to  the  city.  It 
means,  also,  the  people  of  the  city  ;  as,  the  city  was 
in  an  uproar,  or  the  city  voted  so  and  so.  So  bench 
means  a  seat;  it  is  also  used  to  signify  those  who 
sit  on  it ;  as,  in  legal  phrase,  the  full  bench  decided 
so  and  so.  So,  among  the  Jews,  Synagogue  meant 
a  collection  of  people,  and  the  place  in  which  the 
people  collected.  So  Church  expresses  not  only  a 
people  religiously  associated,  but,  agreeably  to  all 
philological  analogy,  it  expresses  also  the  place  where 
they  meet.  Then,  again,  the  building  is  very  prop- 
erly called  church,  because  the  building,  if  properly 
constructed,  if  rightly  cared  for,  becomes  a  symbol 
in  wood  and  stone  of  our  faith  and  love,  our  zeal 
and  devotion. 

Curiously,  with  many,  the  building,  the  wooden 
walls,   is  called  the  Church,  while  the  people,  the 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  91 

living  souls,  are  called  the  Society.  This  week,  in  a 
religious  newspaper,  I  saw  the  term  Church  used  a 
dozen  times,  more  or  less,  as  applied  to  the  building, 
and  Society  invariably  used  as  applied  to  the  people 
that  worshipped  in  it. 

There  are  the  words  meeting  and  meeting-house. 
Meeting  is  a  mere  synonyme  of  society^  and  expresses 
just  as  much.  It  is  no  proper  name  ;  it  is  a  term  of 
definition.  All  assemblings  together  of  human  be- 
ings are  meetings  or  societies  ;  the  term  expresses 
the  simple  fact  of  passing  out  of  the  individual  into 
the  social  state.  The  legislature  is  a  meeting,  a  pic- 
nic is  a  meeting,  the  state  is  a  meeting,  the  family 
is  a  meeting,  a  party  is  a  meeting.  Yet,  in  speaking 
of  the  legislature,  one  never  says  he  is  going  to 
meeting.  Speaking  of  going  to  a  party,  you  never 
say,  I  am  going  to  meeting.  This  peculiar  use  of 
the  word  meeting  is,  in  the  main,  an  Americanism, 
and  a  vulgarity.  Nobody  uses  it  in  dignified  dis- 
course. 

According  to  the  true  theory  of  our  subject,  every- 
body is  in  the  Family,  in  the  State,  in  the  Church. 
Yet  the  power  of  expulsion  is  claimed  for  each  of 
these  great  organizations.  Expulsion  from  the  State 
is  called  banishment,  or  outlawry,  a  thing  more  prac- 
tised in  ancient  than  modern  times  ;  expulsion  from 
the  Church  is  called  excommunication;  from  the 
Family,  disowning.  This  expulsion  is  one  of  the 
greatest  calamities  that  can  befall  a  human  being. 
To  be  an  outlaw,  or  an  excommunicate,  or  a  dis- 
owned,—  to  have  no  country,  no  home,  no  church, 
—  is  among  the  greatest  of  evils. 


92  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY    THE 

Well,  every  man  is  presumed  to  be  in  the  State, 
the  Family,  the  Church,  until,  by  due  process  of  law, 
by  overt  offence  proved  against  him,  he  is  formally 
ejected.     The  point  is  not  for  a  man  to  show  cause 
why  he  should  be  in  the  Church,  but  for  the  Church 
to  show  cause  why  he  should  not  be  there.     In  these 
times,  the  State  does  not  directly  outlaw  people,  but 
in  cases  of  high  crimes  and  misdemeanors  virtually 
does  this  by  sending  them  to  prison.     Such  offenders 
cease  to  be  members  of  the  State.     Their  political 
or   state   rights  are   taken   away.      But  every  man 
born  on  our  soil  can  claim  all  political  or  state  rights 
till  such  offence  is  proved.     He  is  a  state  member  in 
virtue  of  birth.     Here   and   there  you  find  persons 
who,  in  the  providence  of  God,  are  out  of  the  Fam- 
ily.    Their  parents  are  dead ;  their  brothers  and  sis- 
ters, their  husbands  or  wives,  their  children,  all  are 
dead  and  gone  ;  they  have  no  family,  no  home,  no 
place  for  the  family  affections  to  be  garnered  and 
family  joys  to  be  indulged.     They  are,  in  a  word, 
homeless ;  and  I  ask   if  there    is  a  word  in  the  lan- 
guage that  contains  a  more  vivid  picture  of  sadness 
and  sorrow  than  that?     Well,  churchJess  is  just  as 
sad  a  word  ;  and  if  we  had  any  sort  of  right  con- 
ception of  the  subject,  we  should  feel  just  as  wretch- 
ed to  belong  to  no  church  as  to  belong  to  no  family. 
See  how  it  is  in  the   State ;  look  at  Kossuth  ;  what 
is  the  trouble  in  his  mind  ?  what  affects  him  ?    Why, 
he  has  lost  his  country  ;  to  him  there  is  no  true  Hun- 
garian state.     Hungary  exists,  and  the  people,  and 
her  waters,  and  her  skies  ;  but  Kossuth's  ideal  of  a 
state  has  ceased  to  exist.     How  would  any  one  of 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  93 

US  to-day  feel,  if,  in  some  strange  catastrophe,  we  all 
at  once  should  find  we  had  no  country,  no  state,  no 
government ;  that  Russia  had  overturned  the  whole 
framework  of  our  political  society  ? 

There  are  but  three  great  leading,  divine,  and  eter- 
nal organizations  of  mankind,  —  the  Family,  the 
State,  and  the  Church;  and  all  men  are  presumed 
to  be  in  each  of  them.  The  Family  organizes  the 
affections ;  the  State,  political  relations ;  and  the 
Church  is  the  organization  of  the  religious  element. 
The  Church  expresses  eternally  our  relation  to  God ; 
the  State,  citizenship  ;  the  Family,  the  ties  of  husband 
and  wife,  parent  and  child.  You  are  all  interested  in 
the  State  ;  you  rejoice  to  belong  to  it,  and  to  feel  that 
you  are  a  part  of  it.  Indeed,  politics,  or  the  manage- 
ment of  state  affairs,  is  a  ruling  passion  with  some  of 
you.  You  are  all  interested  in  the  Family,  either  in 
that  to  which  you  now  belong,  or  in  the  forming  of 
a  new  one.  What  interest  have  you  in  the  Church  ? 
People  are  proud  of  state  offices,  and  like  to  be 
called  by  the  title  of  their  offices,  as  President,  Gov- 
ernor, Mayor,  Esquire,  Judge  ;  proud,  too,  of  military 
offices,  as  General,  Colonel.  People  are  everywhere 
getting  ashamed  of  a  church  office  ;  indeed,  that 
good  congregational  title  of  Deacon  is  fast  disap- 
pearing from  current  speech.  There  is  no  dignity 
or  honor  attached  to  it.  To  have  an  office  in  the 
State  is  honorable,  and  it  is  a  breach  of  decorum  on 
state  occasions,  nay,  it  is  a  great  offence,  to  omit 
the  title.  To  have  an  office  in  the  Church  is  deemed 
a  sort  of  drudgery.  This  shows  to  what  a  pass  we 
have  come. 


94  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

The  great  mass  of  the  people  are  all  out  of  the 
Church.  What  calls  itself  the  Church  is  merely  a 
select  clique  within  what  is  called  the  Society,  —  a 
clique  growing  smaller  with  every  year ;  and  the 
whole  idea  of  the  Church  is  fast  fading  from  the 
popular  mind.  There  are  fathers  who  are  unwilling 
to  consecrate  their  sons  to  the  service  of  the  Church, 
not  willing  to  educate  them  for  the  ministry.  They 
yield  them  to  the  State  without  a  scruple.  The  am- 
bition of  our  young  men  is  not  to  be  ministers  or 
bishops  of  the  Church,  but  to  be  lawyers,  to  go  to 
Congress,  to  attain  judgeships.  The  path  of  honor 
and  dignity  leads  that  way.  There  is  little  honor  or 
dignity  in  an  office  in  that  highest  of  organizations, 
that  empire  of  supremest  ideas,  the  Church. 

My  friends,  I  ask  you  if  things  shall  go  on  so  ?  I 
ask  you,  as  reasonable  and  Christian  men,  to  help  me 
lift  up  the  Church  to  its  true  place.  I  am  going  to 
labor  for  this,  and  I  want  your  aid.  I  ask  you  to 
accept  the  great  idea  of  the  Church,  and  adjust 
yourselves  thereto.  Some  say  people  will  be  good 
and  religious  without  the  Church ;  so,  I  say,  people 
maybe  good  and  love  one  another  without  the  Fam- 
ily ;  people  may  be  good  and  honest  without  the 
State.  Break  up  your  State  and  your  Family,  and 
see  where  you  will  be.  You  say  we  may  have  bad 
members.  So  you  may  have  bad  children,  bad  citi- 
zens ;  what  are  you  going  to  do  about  it?  You  say 
the  State  and  the  Family  will  get  on  without  the 
Church.     Nay,  they  will  not. 

Things  have  gone  on  in  a  slipshod  sort  of  way  tol- 
erably well,  so  far,  because  of  an  overlying  and  over- 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  95 

awing  church  sentiment,  derived  from  our  fathers. 
Moreover,  the  religious  element,  like  all  other  deep, 
eternal  elements,  evermore  seeks  organization  ;  and 
if  we  liberal,  congregational,  independent  Christians 
furnish  the  popular  want  with  no  Church,  if  others 
about  us  do  not,  then  there  is  something  back  of  and 
behind  us,  back  of  and  behind  the  ages  and  all  ecclesi- 
astical history,  that  will  furnish  one.  Romanism  is 
moving  straight  onwards  to  one  result,  almost  noise- 
lessly, quite  meekly  in  this  country,  to  be  the  Church 
of  Christendom.  For  this  she  is  building  her  splen- 
did Gothic  piles,  at  due  intervals,  in  all  the  land. 
Romanism,  if  nothing  else  will,  will  give  the  people 
a  Church.  Nothing,  in  the  long  run,  can  meet  the 
Romish  Church  but  the  Unitarian  Church  ;  nothing 
can  meet  the  false  Church  but  the  true  Church  ; 
nothing  can  meet  that  which  calls  itself  the  Church 
but  that  which  really  is  the  Church  ;  and  I  say,  in 
face  of  all,  let  others  call  themselves  as  they  may, 
we,  the  Unitarian  body,  are  The  Church. 

Now  understand  me,  my  friends ;  I  speak  of  noth- 
ing awful,  arbitrary,  dangerous  to  liberty,  when  I 
speak  of  the  Church  attitude  that  we  would  take. 
We  are  liberal,  we  are  independent,  we  are  congre- 
gational, we  believe  in  humanity,  we  are  resolved  on 
progress,  we  labor  in  the  highest  ideas  for  the  highest 
ideas.  These  are  fundamental,  unalterable,  eternal 
principles ;  our  Church  shall  be  the  organization  of 
these  great  principles.  Our  fathers  broke  away  from 
the  English  monarchical  state;  did  they  abandon 
the  plan  of  a  state  ?  No.  They  had  great  principles 
of  democratic  freedom.     They  said,  Let  us  organ- 


96  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

ize  these  principles  into  a  state.  We,  too,  will  have 
a  state;  we,  too,  will  be  a  state.  So  they  organized 
or  constituted  those  great  principles  into  a  state.  In 
other  words,  they  formed  a  constitution  embodying 
those  principles,  both  for  themselves  and  their  pos- 
terity for  ever.  And  as  to  themselves,  and  all  that 
they  had  to  do  with,  they  were  the  State.  In  this 
section  of  the  country  they  said,  "  We  do  hereby 
agree  to  form  ourselves  into  a  free  and  independent 
state,  by  the  style  and  title  of  the  State  of  Maine.'' 
What  I  ask  is,  what  the  time  has  come  for  is,  what 
God  demands  is,  that  free  and  independent  Chris- 
tians as  we  are,  —  we,  and  all  in  all  parts  who  agree 
with  us,  form  ourselves  into  a  free  and  indepen- 
dent church,  by  the  style  and  title  of  the  Church  of 
God  and  Christ,  the  Liberal  Church,  the  Unitarian 
Church  of  Maine. 

What  should  be  the  idea  of  The  Church?  All 
that  which,  in  the  State,  liberty  expresses.  In  a 
republican,  democratic  state,  the  Church  should  be 
republican  and  democratic.  It  should  have  no  creed 
but  the  Bible,  no  ultimate  head  but  Christ.  Its 
bond  should  be  the  Holy  Spirit,  its  sentiment  frater- 
nization, its  purpose  perfection  of  our  being,  its  du- 
ration everlasting.  Already  we  have  the  materials 
of  such  a  Church, —  ideas  matured,  many  a  sacred 
tradition  to  be  incorporated  into  it,  thinking  and 
earnest  men  and  women,  consecrated  edifices,  pas- 
tors duly  ordained. 

My  friends,  I  call  upon  you  all  to  awaken  to  some 
jthoughts  upon  and  some  endeavors  after  that  grand- 
est of  human  organizations,  the  Church.     Disabuse 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  97 

your  minds  of  prejudices  and  errors  ;  and  while  em- 
bracing the  conception,  devote  yourselves  to  the  actu- 
alization of  the  Church.  We  want  that  deep  feel- 
ing in  the  heart  which  says,  I  love  thy  Church,  O 
Lord  !  You  do  say,  all  of  you  say,  the  children  say, 
I  love  my  home,  I  love  my  country.  I  want  a  sen- 
timent which  says,  I  love  my  Church.  I  want  some 
of  our  young  men  who  are  thinking  of  college  and 
an  education  to  say,  I  will  devote  myself  to  the 
Church,  I  will  become  a  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  I 
cast  my  lot,  I  fulfil  my  destiny,  in  that  great  divine 
organization  of  which  Christ  is  the  Head,  and  where 
apostles  and  martyrs  are  my  predecessors. 

Again,  I  want  so  much  Church  feeling  that  men 
of  wealth  will  so  love  the  Church  as  to  bestow  more 
of  their  means  upon  it.  I  need  not  soften  matters  ; 
the  simple  fact  is,  the  Church,  as  an  organization,  in 
all  its  ramifications  and  modes,  needs  money,  just  as 
much  as  the  State  or  the  Family  needs  it.  It  is  just 
as  right  and  proper  that  a  man  of  his  abundance 
should  give  abundantly  to  the  Church,  as  that  he 
should  to  the  Family  or  the  State.  We  give  volun- 
tarily to  the  Family  and  to  the  Church,  and  by  tax- 
ation, by  a  species  of  compulsion,  if  you  will,  to  the 
State  ;  but  the  principle  is  the  same.  Every  man  of 
us  ought  to  consider  his  church  tax  or  church  sub- 
scription just  as  binding,  just  as  promptly  to  be 
attended  to,  and  as  much  a  part  of  his  indispensable 
yearly  outlay,  as  any  other  necessary  expense. 

Then,  again,  I  want  our  men  of  leisure  to  devote 
themselves  more  to  the  Church,  to  the  thought  of  the 
Church,  to  the  consideration  of  what  the  Church  is 


98  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 


and  should  be,  to  laboring  for  the  Church,  to  extend- 
ing its  influence,  to  deepening  its  purity  and  power,  to 
looking  after  its  minor  wants,  its  buildings,  its  furni- 
ture. See,  here  is  a  man  out  of  business.  He  has 
leisure  and  means  ;  he  hardly  knows  what  to  do  with 
himself;  he  reads  newspapers,  frequents  political 
meetings,  and  affects  many  things.  Let  that  man  de- 
vote himself  to  the  Church,  feel  that  the  Church  is  a 
thing  to  be  interested  in,  feel  how  vast  is  its  scope, 
how  infinite  its  bearings.  How  the  old  Romanists, 
men,  wom^n,  and  children,  loved  their  Church,  and 
what  a  Church  they  made  of  it !  how  their  painters 
painted  for  it,  and  their  musicians  composed  for  it,  and 
their  architects  planned  for  it !  what  beautiful,  what 
gorgeous  needlework  their  women  wrought  for  it! 
Look  once  a  month  between  this  city  and  Hallowell 
or  Gardiner,  of  a  Sunday,  and  see  the  Romanists, 
youths  and  children,  old  men  and  maidens,  —  in 
winter  snows,  or  mire  of  March,  or  heat  of  midsum- 
mer, —  trudging  afoot  to  their  church  in  this  city ! 
What  is  the  reason  ?  There  are  many,  but  the  un- 
derlying reason  is,  they  have  a  Church,  they  all 
belong  to  it,  its  history  is  theirs,  its  hopes  are  theirs ; 
in  all  its  majesty,  in  all  its  promise,  the  Church  of 
Rome  fills  each  little  boy's,  each  little  girl's  heart,  as 
a  part  of  their  own  being.  Hence  it  is  so  difficult 
ever  to  proselyte  them  away  from  their  Church. 
They  are  all  baptized  into  it  in  infancy;  it  becomes 
their  very  essence  ;  they  grow  into  its  image.  Hence 
none  of  our  Protestant  revivals,  no  Protestant  prop- 
agandism,  can  ever  touch  a  Roman  Catholic.  If 
Romanism,  with  all  its  errors  and  wrongs,  can  build 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.  99 

up  such  a  Church,  what  cannot  Unitarianism,  or 
pure  Christianity,  do,  if  we  will  but  set  about  it  in 
the  right  way  ?  You  say,  we  have  not  the  authority 
that  Church  pretends  to  exercise.  True  ;  neither  has 
democracy  the  power  of  monarchy.  But  can  we  not 
on  a  democratic  basis  rear  as  glorious  and  goodly  a 
state  in  this  country  as  they  have  in  Great  Britain 
or  Austria  ?  So  on  a  Unitarian  or  Liberal  basis  we 
can  rear  as  glorious  and  goodly  a  Church  as  any  the 
world  has  seen. 

The  true  Church,  the  Unitarian  Church  if  you 
will,  wants  painters,  musicians,  architects,  —  in  a 
word,  it  desires  that  genius  and  art  should  devote 
themselves  to  the  Church,  as  well  as  to  the  State  or 
the  Family.  See  how  comprehensive  is  that  word, 
"  The  Church."  It  stands  for  the  glorious  body  in 
all  worlds  of  which  Christ,  under  God,  is  the  head  ; 
this  primarily.  But  next,  it  stands  for  a  collection 
of  Christian  people  ;  it  stands  for  people  organized 
into  a  pastorate  or  parish  ;  it  stands  for  worship, 
or  people  met  for  worship  ;  it  stands  for  the  ordi- 
nances, and  for  the  building  or  house  in  which  such 
people  meet ;  finally,  it  is  a  collective  idea,  and  rep- 
resents in  one  word  the  whole  of  these  things. 

I  have  said  that  there  is  an  instinct  of  the  Church, 
as  much  as  an  instinct  of  the  State  or  the  Fam- 
ily, a  sort  of  appetency  for  the  highest  organiza- 
tion of  the  highest  truths ;  a  desire  of  fellowship  and 
communion  in  the  highest  society  ;  and  the  Church 
in  all  ages  and  everywhere  represents  this  organiza- 
tion, and  men  are  not  satisfied  out  of  it,  and  mean 
some  time  to  be  in   it.     Yet,  in  this  country,  the 


100  THE    CHURCH,    ILLUSTRATED    BY 

instinct  of  the  State  is  fast  superseding  that  of  the 
Church ;  in  other  words,  religion  yields  to  politics. 
This  was  the  case  with  those  of  whom  I  spoke ;  it 
is  the  case  everywhere.  I  ask  you  again,  these  mid- 
dle and  mature  aged  men,  if  you  are  willing  to  give 
your  freshness  and  energy,  the  meridian  of  your 
days,  the  flood  of  your  being,  to  the  State,  and  only 
reserve  a  few  last  ebbing  pulsations  of  penitence  and 
submission  for  the  Church  ?  Will  the  Church  be 
content  with  only  that  ?  1  say,  the  true  Church  will 
not.  Of  course,  it  will  receive  a  man  at  the  elev- 
enth hour.  But  it  wants  your  vigor,  it  would  em- 
brace the  full  circle  of  your  days,  while,  at  the  same 
time,  it  would  cooperate  and  sympathize  w^ith  you 
in  all  rightful  ends. 

Are  Roman  Catholics  the  Church  ?  are  the  Rus- 
sians the  Church  ?  are  Episcopalians  or  Methodists 
the  Church  ?  Are  little  companies,  gathered  exclu- 
sively within  the  various  religious  societies,  the 
Church  ?  To  me,  to  us,  they  are  not.  They  may 
call  themselves  so,  they  may  think  so,  if  they  will ; 
that  is  their  concern,  not  mine.  To  me,  to  us,  there 
can  be  no  church,  except  that  which  has  Christ  for 
its  head  and  the  Gospel  for  its  creed ;  none  but  that 
in  which  humanity  and  nature  and  reason  are 
recognized  ;  none  but  a  liberal  and  progressive  one. 
Therefore,  to  ourselves,  we  are  the  Church  ;  for  us 
there  is,  there  can  be,  no  higher.  Are  you  prepared 
for  this  sentiment  ?  Can  you  respond  to  it,  "  We 
are  the  Church."  For  one,  here  I  stand;  and  if 
there  be  but  three  others  in  the  wide  world  to 
stand   by   me,  here  I   stand  and  say,   We   are  the 


THE  FAMILY  AND  THE  STATE.         101 

Church.  If  this  be  not  so,  if  there  be  aught  higher 
than  we,  if  there  be  aught  that  is  the  Church  more 
than  we,  then  this  parish  is  as  nothing,  these  walls 
and  worship  are  nothing,  then  the  whole  thing  of 
Liberal  Christianity  is  nothing. 

No,  but  to  us  the  whole  thing  of  Liberal  Chris- 
tianity, of  a  pure  and  unadulterated  Christianity,  is 
every  thing.  Where  the  organization  of  that  is  must 
be  to  us  The  Church  ;  there  can  be  no  other.  We 
do  not  want,  we  will  not  have,  nor  be,  a  partial,  or 
sectarian,  or  a  narrow,  or  a  bigoted  church.  We 
will  have  a  church  where  the  profoundest  philoso- 
phy and  science  can  worship  and  commune,  where 
the  largest  humanity  can  worship  and  commune, 
where  the  highest  intelligence  and  reason  can  wor- 
ship and  commune.  There  is  a  religious  element  in 
science,  in  humanity,  in  reason,  but  these  are  all  out 
of  the  sympathy  of  the  Church  ;  that  is,  the  so-called 
churches  do  not  recognize  their  affinity,  and  men  of 
science,  as  such,  worship  in  no  church.  Yet  they 
seek  the  fellowship  of  God  and  truth,  and  we  will 
give  it  to  them.  I  have  already  said  that  our  states- 
men are  out  of  the  Church.  The  Church  has  no 
dignity  in  their  eyes,  compared  with  the  State.  Its 
creeds,  to  a  multitude  of  minds,  are  a  set  of  old 
wives'  fables,  its  sanctity  a  species  of  tallow-faced 
imbecility,  its  mysteries  a  contrivance  to  beguile 
weak  minds. 

We  can  have  a  true  Church  ;  God  is  calling  us  to 
restore  the  beauty  of  Zion.  We  can  resolve  our- 
selves into  the  Church  ;  we  can  covenant  with  God 
and  Christ,  with  reason  and  nature,  to  be  theirs  for 

9* 


102  THE    CHURCH,    FAMILY,    AND    STATE. 

ever.  We  can  have  a  Church  into  the  fellowship  of 
which  all  great  and  pure  minds,  as  well  as  all  weak 
and  tender  ones,  shall  love  to  enter,  —  a  Church  to 
which  knowledge,  hope,  progress,  and  all  possibilities 
of  humanity  shall  flock  as  clouds,  and  doves  to  their 
windows ;  a  Church  honored  and  respected  by  the 
world ;  a  Church,  my  friends,  where  we  may  be 
happy  together,  where  we  may  commune  together, 
where  our  highest  and  best  desires  may  be  satisfied 
together ;  a  Church  that  shall  be  as  an  open  door  to 
us  into  the  skies,  where,  when  we  go  hence,  we  shall 
meet  those  who  have  gone  before  us;  a  Church 
where  the  Holy  Spirit  will  for  ever  dwell,  in  which 
Christ  is,  and  under  and  around  and  over  which  is 
God  our  Heavenly  Father. 


SEEM  ON    VII. 


THE  CHURCH  HEREDITABLE. 

THE  PEOMISE  IS  UNTO  TOU,  AND  TO  TOUR  CHILDREN.— 

Acts  ii.  39. 

In  a  discourse  a  few  months  since,  I  undertook  to 
show  that  children  sustain,  primarily  and  fundamen- 
tally, a  birth-relation  to  the  Church.  I  now  say,  in 
continuation  of  the  subject,  that  the  children  are 
included  in  the  covenant  of  the  Church ;  that  no 
church-covenant  is  complete  that  does  not  include 
the  children ;  that  it  is  not  only  not  complete,  but 
radically  and  fatally  defective ;  that  this  was  the  origi- 
nal economy  of  God  in  the  arrangement  of  human 
relations,  the  foundation  laid  by  God  in  nature  for 
the  perpetuity  of  the  principal  institutions  of  the  race ; 
that  this  was  the  principle  that  entered  into  the 
construction  of  the  primitive  Church.  I  affirm, 
moreover,  that  there  is  no  other  practicable  theory 
of  the  Church ;  no  other  tenable  or  rational  or 
Scriptural  ground  on  which  to  place  it. 

The  Church  is  not  a  Masonic  Fraternity  or  an 
Odd  Fellows'  Lodge,  into  which  one  adult  man  is 


104  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

elected,  and  from  which  another  adult  man  is  reject- 
ed ;  the  benefits  of  which  only  accrue  to  the  member 
during  his  lifetime,  and  do  not  pass  over  to  his  chil- 
dren.    It  is,  in  the  strong  language  of  the  Bible,  a 
heritage ;  its  dignity  and  honor,  its  law  and  constitu- 
tion,  its   rights   and   ceremonies,  its   duties  and   its 
responsibilities,  descend  from  parent  to  child  even  so 
long  as  there  shall  remain  a  seed  on  the  earth.     It  is 
not  a  business   partnership,  nor  an  association   for 
moral  improvement,  nor  a  meeting  of  an  evening  ;  it 
expresses  the   eternal  form  of  human  beings  in  that 
eternal  relation  to  the  worship  of  God,  communion 
with  Christ,  and  everlasting  progress  of  the  soul.    By 
hereditable,  I  mean  this :  that  as  our  political  con- 
stitution  descends    from   the    fathers    to    the    sons, 
so  does   that  of  the   Church;  as  the  peculiar  prin- 
ciples  that    govern    us    as    a  nation   descend  from 
father   to  son,  so   do  those  of  the   Church  ;  as  the 
whole  thing  that  we  call  the  State  is  transmitted,  so 
is  the  whole  of  that  called  the  Church.    Just,  too,  as 
this  church   edifice  is  an  inheritance    from   our  fa- 
thers, and  we  shall  transmit  it  to  our  sons,  so  is  all 
that  which  this  edifice  symbolizes, —  Christian  truth, 
w^orship,  liberty,  progress,  unity,  immortality. 

I  affirm,  that  the  analogy  of  all  history  of  all 
times  and  places  and  subjects,  favors  the  view 
herein  expressed.  For  instance,  in  ancient  Greece, 
where  the  Church  and  State  were  one,  or  where  the 
administration  of  public  religious  and  political  af- 
fairs was  under  one  general  direction,  both  Church 
and  State  were  hereditable ;  in  other  words,  the 
children  were  born  into  one  as  much  as  into  the 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  105 

other ;  the  covenant  of  the  fathers  included  the  chil- 
dren ;  each  generation  took  up  the  prevailing  insti- 
tutions where  the  preceding  one  left  them,  and  possi- 
bly carried  them  to  greater  perfection.  The  form  of 
recognition  at  Athens  was  a  simple  registry  of  names, 
and  this  was  done  three  times  ;  first,  in  the  year  of 
birth  ;  second,  at  the  age  of  eighteen  ;  the  third,  at 
twenty  ;  all  the  rights  of  citizenship  and  church-mem- 
bership simultaneously  and  in  due  order  of  time  ac- 
cruing. No  Athenian  could  be  deprived  of  any  relig- 
ious privilege  unless  he  had  been  convicted  of  some 
great  offence.  The  same  is  true  of  Rome,  and  indeed 
of  every  country  the  history  of  which  has  reached  us. 
The  form  among  the  Romans  was  a  change  of  dress. 
Young  people  wore  a  gown  bordered  with  purple, 
called  the  toga  prcetexta;  at  the  age  of  sixteen  they 
put  on  the  toga  virilis,  or  manly  gown,  which  was 
also  called  toga  pura^  because  it  was  purely  white. 
These  seasons  of  registry  among  the  Greeks,  and 
of  change  of  apparel  among  the  Romans,  were 
solemnized  by  religious  observance.  In  these,  as  in 
other  instances  to  which  we  might  refer,  there  was 
a  period  of  infancy  and  minority,  and  of  majority 
or  manhood.  But  the  essential  point  was  birth  and 
age.  In  the  Church,  as  in  the  State,  there  is  perhaps 
what  may  be  termed  a  minor  membership  and  a 
major  membership. 

But  I  wish  now  to  inquire  more  particularly  what 
the  Bible  teaches  on  this  subject,  and  what  is  God's 
revealed  will.  And  first  I  shall  ask  attention  to  the 
Abrahamic  covenant,  which  gave  a  character  to  the 
whole  Jewish  history,  and  from  which  also  Chris- 


106  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

tianity  derives  a  certain  complexion.  We  read  in 
the  book  of  Genesis,  that  God  said  unto  Abraham, 
"  Behold,  I  make  my  covenant  with  thee,  and  thou 
shalt  be  a  father  of  many  nations,  and  I  will  estab- 
lish my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and  thy  seed 
after  thee^  in  their  generations^  for  an  everlasting 
covenant^  to  he  a  God  nnto  thee^  and  thy  seed  after 
thee^  This  was  the  token  of  the  covenant,  that 
every  man-child  at  eight  days  old  should  be  circum^ 
cised.  Here  is  the  foundation  or  beginning  of  what 
for  the  sake  of  convenience  may  be  called  the 
Abrahamic  Church,  or  Abrahamic  State,  or  Abra- 
hamic  dispensation.  This  was  before  Christ,  about 
the  year  2000.  Here  was  a  solemn  covenant,  com- 
munion, fellowship,  between  Abraham  and  God. 
And  all  the  children^  as  fast  as  they  ivere  born,  were 
born  into  it;  and  at  eight  days  old  they  were  circum- 
cised as  the  seal  of  their  membership.  These  few 
words  express  the  theory  and  the  fact  of  the  whole 
Jewish  economy.  To  Abraham  Isaac  was  born, 
and  he  was  included  in  the  covenant  or  Church  ;  to 
Isaac  succeeded  Jacob,  and  so  on.  There  is  no 
halting,  no  intermission,  no  questioning. 

After  about  four  hundred  years  Moses  led  the 
Israelites,  the  Abrahamic  Church,  out  of  Egypt,  and, 
with  some  additions  to  their  Jaws,  rites,  and  customs, 
they  were  established  in  the  land  of  Canaan.  But 
the  rule  of  succession  and  the  rite  of  recognition 
underwent  no  change.  The  Abrahamic  Church  was 
bereditable.  These  Israelites  are  called  a  holy  peo- 
ple, a  kingdom  of  priests,  and  also  saints.  They  are 
said  to  be  sanctified,  and  this  in  anticipation,  this  of 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  107 

children  yet  to  be  born,  of  generations  that  only  in  the 
way  of  nature  would  be  connected  with  what  had 
gone  before  them.  All  this  is  true  and  plain.  I  do 
not  know  that  anybody  doubts  it,  I  do  not  know 
that  anybody  misunderstands  it.  You  may  ask  how 
those  as  yet  unborn,  who  had  done  neither  good  nor 
evil,  could  be  called  holy.  The  fact  is,  they  were  so 
called.  God  himself  did  not  hesitate  to  predicate  holi- 
ness of  all  the  children  of  those  included  in  his  cove- 
nant with  Abraham.  "  Ye  shall  be  to  me,"  he  says, 
"  a  holy  nation."  "  All  the  congregation  is  holy, 
every  one  of  them."  "  Ye  are  the  children  of  the 
Lord  your  God."  The  presumption  was,  that  every 
child  was  holy  ;  holy  according  to  the  standard  of 
Judaism,  until  the  contrary  was  proved;  just  as  un- 
der our  state  economy  every  citizen  is  presumed  to 
be  honest  and  innocent  until  the  contrary  is  proved. 
In  the  Abrahamic  or  Jewish  Church,  provision  was 
made  against  transgression,  as  is  done  in  our  politi- 
cal state.  If  a  man  violated  the  law  of  God,  he  was 
to  be  dealt  with.  So  if  a  man  violates  the  law  of  the 
land,  he  is  dealt  with.  The  result  was,  that  all  the 
Jewish  men,  women,  and  children  were  in  the  Jewish 
Church ;  the  majority,  the  masses,  the  people,  were 
there  ;  the  exception  being  here  and  there  one  who 
had  been  cut  off. 

Now,  whether  this  was  well,  or  wise,  or  judicious, 
it  was  just  what  God,  so  far  as  he  had  any  connec- 
tion with  Judaism,  wished  should  be.  It  was  what 
he  expressly  ordered,  and  so  to  say,  stipulated  for. 
We  are  shut  up  to  this  conclusion,  that  God,  in  ar- 
ranging the  economy  of  the  Church,  so  arranged  it 


108  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

that  it  should  be  hereditable ;  placed  it  on  this  basis 
and  no  other ;  excluded  every  other  basis,  that  he 
might  put  it  on  this.  True,  the  Jews  were  not  al- 
ways faithful  to  their  God,  their  covenant,  and  their 
Church.  And  they  suffered  severely  for  their  sins 
and  follies.  But  what  was  it  that  brought  them 
back  to  fidelity  ?  It  was  the  remembrance  of  the 
responsibility  they  were  under  to  their  God,  their 
covenant,  and  their  Church.  These  responsibilities 
never  left  them  in  all  their  declensions  and  backslid- 
ings ;  and  their  covenant  relation  to  God  was  ever 
urged  upon  them  as  a  motive  to  virtue  and  perfec- 
tion.    So  far  our  way  is  clear. 

Two  thousand  years  elapse,  and  Christ  appears. 
Now  I  desire  to  ask,  if  the  economy,  purpose,  or 
plan  of  God  respecting  his  Church  changed  ;  changed, 
I  mean,  in  the  particular  of  which  I  am  speaking  ? 
Doubtless  there  were  changes.  Moses  is  changed 
for  Christ,  Judaism  for  Christianity,  universal  wor- 
ship succeeds  worship  at  Jerusalem,  universal  love 
national  love  ;  God  enters  into  a  new  covenant,  or 
relation,  with  his  children.  We  leave  the  Jewish 
Church  and  enter  the  Christian  Church.  But  has 
the  law  of  succession  changed  ?  Is  not  the  Church 
still  hereditable  ?  If  there  be  a  change,  I  know  no 
evidence  of  it,  I  can  find  not  one  particle  of  evidence 
of  it.  Can  any  man  direct  me  where  I  shall  find 
even  the  first  hint  of  such  alteration  ?  Indeed,  there 
is  nosuch  evidence;  indeed,  the  testimony,  as  I  shall 
presently  show,  is  all  the  other  way.  The  covenant 
blessings  of  God  seem  to  have  been  confined  hitherto 
to   the   Jewish    nation.     Christ  comes  and  scatters 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  109 

these  blessings  over  the  world.  A  stream  of  Divine 
favor  seems  to  have  been  flowing  through  Judea,  and 
when  it  reached  the  borders  of  that  land  to  have 
stopped,  and,  as  it  were,  risen  very  high.  Christ 
comes  and  breaks  down  the  gates,  and  lets  the 
waters  of  life  flow  over  all  people.  His  ministration 
includes,  not  merely  the  lineal  descendants  of  Abra- 
ham, who  had  often  proved  themselves  unworthy  of 
everlasting  life,  but  Greek  and  Roman,  Barbarian 
and  Scythian.  Christ  would  establish  a  universal 
Church ;  God,  he  says,  will  enter  into  covenant  with 
all  races,  and  I  am  the  mediator  of  the  New  Cove- 
nant. Believe  in  me,  he  says,  and  accept  the  prom- 
ise God  makes  through  me.  The  seal  of  the  old  cov- 
enant was  in  the  flesh,  the  new  one  is  in  the  heart ; 
the  old  law  was  written  on  tables  of  stone,  the  new 
one  in  the  mind.  Believe  this  to  be  true  that  I  tell 
you.  It  is  glad  tidings,  it  is  the  Gospel,  and  you, 
John  and  Peter,  go  and  proclaim  the  glad  tidings. 
The  old  law,  or  "  the  law,"  as  it  is  concisely  called, 
the  law  of  Moses,  was  defective  ;  it  said.  An  eye 
for  an  eye ;  the  new  law  says.  Nay,  resist  not  evil ; 
the  old  law  said,  Kill  your  enemies ;  the  new.  Love 
them ;  the  old  said.  Salvation  is  of  the  Jews ;  the 
new.  Salvation  is  for  all;  the  old  law  made  the  body 
holy  ;  the  new  makes  the  spmt  holy. 

There  were  great  interior  differences  between 
Christ  and  Moses,  between  the  Christian  Church 
and  the  Jewish  Church,  but  were  there  administra- 
tive differences  ?  Was  not  the  rule  of  succession  the 
same  ?  Did  not  the  children  of  the  Christian  Church 
inherit  the  Christian  Church  ?     The  covenant  with 

10 


110  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

Abraham  was  hereditary  in  its  operations.  And  I 
ask  you  particularly  to  observe,  that  this  covenant 
was  for  all  nations.  Yet  for  two  thousand  years  it 
was  confined  to  one  nation,  the  Israelites.  Now 
when  Christ  came  with  his  liberal,  human,  cosmo- 
politan purposes,  when  he  came  to  open  the  door  of 
the  true  Church  to  all  men,  the  Jews,  or  their  teach- 
ers and  chiefs,  took  umbrage,  and  for  this  cause  per- 
haps more  than  any  other  they  compassed  his  death. 
Even  the  Jewish  Christians  could  not  for  a  long 
while  get  over  their  feeling  of  exclusiveness.  Salva- 
tion is  of  the  Jews,  was  a  sentiment  ever  ringing  in 
their  ears,  and  blazing  before  their  imaginations. 
Hence  a  dispute,  and  in  settling  this  dispute  yau  get 
a  key  to  all  of  Paul's  Epistles.  In  the  light  of  the 
question  now  agitated,  these  Epistles  of  Paul  become 
luminous  and  beautiful. 

Paul  says,  God  made  a  covenant  with  Abraham, 
for  all  nations;  and  the  promise,  the  old,  original 
promise,  was,  that  in  his  seed  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  should  be  blessed.  But  hitherto  only  the  Jew- 
ish nation  has  been  blessed.  But  Christ  has  come, 
argues  the  Apostle,  who  is  the  seed  of  Abraham,  and 
in  him  now  all  nations  are  to  be  blessed.  Every- 
body, anywhere,  Jew  or  Greek,  who  believes  Christ, 
and  accepts  the  great  principles  he  inculcates,  enters 
into  the  covenant  of  the  promise,  and  is  a  child  of 
God.  So  far  all  is  clear.  But  I  ask  attention  to 
this '.-  Paul  claimed  that  the  old  covenant  made  with 
Abraham  two  thousand  years  before  was  fulfilled, 
completed,  or  rather,  fully  carried  into  execution,  by 
Christ.     But  the  Jews,  or  the  Judaistic   Christians, 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  Ill 

said,  See  here  :  we  have  a  law;  it  was  given  by  Mo- 
ses four  hundred  years  after  the  time  of  Abraham  ;  it 
prescribes  circumcision,  sundry  washings,  new  moons, 
sabbath-days,  various  rites  and  ordinances,  —  in  other 
words,  quite  a  variety  of  outward  works  ;  and  we 
insist  that  that  law  remains,  and  is  binding ;  and, 
even  if  one  does  become  a  disciple  of  the  Nazarene, 
he  must  still  keep  the  law.  Very  well,  Paul  says, 
then  you  are  going  to  make  all  men  Jews ;  you  will 
have  them  all  circumcised,  and  he  that  is  debtor  to 
any  part  of  the  law  is  debtor  to  the  whole ;  and 
there  is  no  possible  escape  for  any  man.  But  the 
original  covenant  with  Abraham  included  all  nations, 
and  your  law,  which  was  four  hundred  and  thirty 
years  after,  cannot  disannul  the  covenant  before  con- 
firmed of  God  in  Christ,  to  be  ultimately  accom.- 
plished  in  Christ.  In  plain  words,  Paul  says  salva- 
tion has  come  to  the  Gentiles.  Christ  has  redeemed 
us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  your  law,  —  from  the 
curse  denounced  on  such  as  violate  it;  we  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  it ;  and  all,  that  the  bless- 
ings covenanted  to  Abraham  might  come  upon  the 
Gentiles.  In  a  word,  according  to  Paul,  the  Abra- 
hamic  covenant  is  not  only  fulfilled,  but,  as  it  were, 
revived,  and  truly  developed  in  Christianity.  This 
too,  I  believe,  is  generally  admitted.  But  the  great 
point  back  of  all  this  is  wholly  lost  to  view,  that  the 
original  Abrahamic  covenant  and  Abrahamic  Church 
included  the  children,  was  hereditable. 

This  fundamental  principle,  I  argue,  underwent 
no  change.  The  Christian  covenant  and  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  however  in  other  things  it  may  differ 


112  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

from  the  other,  must  in  this  agree  with  it,  that  it  also 
includes  the  children.  There  is  a  difference,  a  change 
in  an  important  particular ;  circumcision  was  the  seal 
or  token  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant ;  while,  with  most 
pedobaptists,  baptism  takes  the  place  of  circumcis- 
ion. But  circumcision  was  the  sign  that  the  child 
was  in  the  bosom  and  fellowship  of  the  Abrahamic 
Church,  as  a  minor,  indeed,  at  first,  but  afterwards 
as  a  major  ;  and  why  should  not  baptism  be  a  seal 
or  token  that  a  child  is  in  the  Christian  Church  ?  I 
know  that  infant  baptism  nowhere  among  the  sects 
that  we  are  most  familiar  with  is  so  regarded. 

I  insist  that  as  God  did  with  Abraham,  so  also  he 
did  with  Christ,  establish  a  covenant  with  him  and 
his  seed  after  him,  in  their  generations,  for  an  ever- 
lasting covenant.  And  the  seed  of  Christ  are  those 
who  believe  in  him.  Peter,  in  the  text,  emphatically 
declares,  "  The  promise  is  unto  you,  and  to  your 
children."  This,  then,  is  my  first  direct  argument 
from  Scripture  for  maintaining  that  the  Church  is 
hereditable,  or  includes  the  children,  —  the  connection 
that  St.  Paul  declares  to  subsist  between  the  Abra- 
hamic and  the  Christian  covenant. 

2.  Another  reason  for  the  same  view  is  this : 
Christ  is  made  the  heir  of  all  things.  The  inherit- 
ance which  had  been  in  the  hand  of  Abraham  or 
Moses,  now  passes  into  that  of  Christ.  But  we  are 
joint  heirs  with  Christ,  or  we  are  heirs  of  God  in 
Christ,  not  Abraham,  and  our  children  inherit  with 
us  of  very  necessity.  An  inheritance  is  of  course 
hereditable.  This  new  dispensation,  this  new  cove- 
nant, this  that  we  call  the  Christian  Church,  the  in- 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  113 

heritance  that  the  Apostle  speaks  of,  is  hereditable. 
"  We  have  an  inheritance  in  the  kingdom  of  God  "  ; 
"  in  Christ  we  have  obtained  an  inheritance."  (Eph. 
i.  11.)  "  We  are  heirs  according  to  the  promise." 
Judaism  had  been  the  inheritance,  the  Jews  were 
heirs,  and  they  thought  themselves  sole  heirs.  No, 
Paul  says ;  and  here  was  the  point  which  was  a  mys- 
tery to  the  Jewish  mind,  and  which  —  not  the  Incar- 
nation, not  the  Trinity  —  is  the  mystery  of  the  Gos- 
pel, that  "  the  Gentiles  too  should  be  fellow-heirs, 
and  of  the  same  body,  and  partakers  of  God's  prom- 
ise in  Christ ;  which  in  other  ages  (in  the  times  of 
Isaac,  and  Moses,  and  David)  was  not  made  known 
unto  the  sons  of  men,  but  is  now  revealed  unto  the 
holy  apostles  and  prophets  by  the  Spirit."  (Eph. 
iii.  5,  6.)  Of  course,  then,  I  say,  as  the  Jews  and 
their  descendants  had  been  heirs  of  the  original  cove- 
nant, and  all  its  rights  and  privileges,  so  are  we  and 
ours,  in  all  senses  of  the  word,  heirs  under  the  new 
dispensation.  "  And  if  we  are  Christ's,  we  are  Abra- 
ham's seed,  [as  really  as  the  Jews,]  and  heirs  accord- 
ing to  the  promise."     (Gal.  iii.  29.) 

Paul's  idea  seems  to  have  been  something  of  this 
sort,  that  God  really  entered  into  covenant  with 
Abraham,  not  for  the  Jews  only,  but  for  all  the 
world,  and  all  time  ;  but  that  the  Jews  had  somehow 
monopolized  the  covenant  till  Christ  came,  who  re- 
stored its  true  meaning,  and  applied  it  to  its  true 
use,  that  of  distribution  equally  among  all  the  races 
of  men.  Hence  he  says  what  I  have  just  quoted,  If 
we  are  Christ's,  we  are  verily  Abraham's  seed,  and 
10* 


114  THE     CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

heirs  according  to  the  promise  originally  made  to  the 
patriarch. 

3.  My  third  argument  for  a  hereditable  Church,  or 
that  the  children  of  the  Church  belong  to  the  Church, 
is  found  in  the  express  declaration  of  Scripture. 
Our  text  would  seem  to  be  decisive,  —  "  The  promise 
is  unto  you,  and  to  your  children."  This  is  said  im- 
mediately after  the  ascension,  when  the  disciples 
began  to  adjust  themselves  to  their  great  work,  and 
is  spoken  to  the  Jews  for  the  purpose  of  winning 
them  to  the  new  covenant.  But  its  intent  cannot  be 
mistaken.  It  is  the  Christian  promise  ;  or,  if  you 
please,  it  is  the  old  Abrahamic  promise  now  revived 
in  Christ.  But  the  point  before  us  is,  it  is  for  "  the 
children."  It  is  the  same  language  God  had  em- 
ployed in  all  ages,  and  its  import  could  not  have  been 
misunderstood,  that  God  would  covenant  with  them 
for  their  children,  or  for  their  children  in  them. 

There  is  this  remarkable  passage:  "  The  unbeliev- 
ing husband  is  sanctified  by  the  wife,  and  the  unbe- 
lieving wife  is  sanctified  by  the  husband ;  else  were 
your  children  unclean ;  but  now  are  they  holy." 
(1  Cor.  vi.  14.)  The  Jews  were  called  holy  because 
they  were  a  covenant  people  of  God  ;  their  children 
were  deemed  holy  because  they  were  included  in  the 
same  covenant.  The  conclusion  is  irresistible,  that, 
inasmuch  as  the  children  of  believing  parents  are 
declared  by  the  Apostle  to  be  holy,  they  must  of 
necessity  be  included  in  the  Christian  covenant. 

The  case  is  this.  The  Bible,  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, presumes  all  Jews  to  be  holy,  and  their  chil- 
dren with  them  :  "  Ye  shall  be  to  me  a  holy  nation  " ; 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 


115 


"  Every  male  child  shall  be  called  holy  to  the  Lord." 
In  the  New  Testament,  it  presumes  all  Christians 
to  be  holy,  as  Paul  calls  them  holy  brethren,  holy 
women,  elect  of  God  and  holy,  and  then-  children  with 
them.  If  holy  here  means  consecrated  to  God,  it 
means  that  the  children,  as  well  as  the  parents,  are 
consecrated.  Not  but  that  Jews  and  Christians,  par- 
ents and  children,  may  sin,  as  we  know  they  did 
sin.  I  say  the  fact  may  be  that  they  sin,  but  the 
presumption  in  the  Bible  is  that  the  children  of  good 
parents  will  be  good.  Just  as,  in  the  United  States, 
the  presumption  is  that  the  people  are  republicans  and 
lovers  of  liberty,  although  there  may  be  people  here 
who  are  monarchical  in  principle.  This  presumption 
covers  the  children.  In  a  Mohammedan  country,  the 
presumption  is  that  all  the  people  are  temperate,  and 
that  the  children  will  grow  up  into  temperance,  and 
be  consecrated  to  total  abstinence.  Yet  the  fact 
may  possibly  be  that  some  drink  wine  and  strong 
liquors.  We  are  obliged  to  presume  one  thing  or 
the  other,  and  address  ourselves  accordingly.  The 
passage  last  quoted  presumes  the  children  of  believ- 
ers to  be  believers,  minor  believers,  and  deals  with 
them  as  such.  There  are  presumptive  heirs  to  the 
throne  of  an  empire,  and  they  are  always  addressed 
and  treated  as  such,  even  though  they  may  die,  or 
rebel,  or  abjure  their  country  long  before  the  expected 
place  is  vacant. 

4.  My  fourth  argument  is  drawn  from  the  lan- 
guage of  Christ  touching  children,  and  his  manner 
of  treating  them.  Christ  came  to  renew  the  cove- 
nant of  God  with  man ;  he  came  to  gather  into  one 


116  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

those  that  were  near  and  those  that  were  afar  off;  he 
came,  if  you  please  so  to  say,  to  form  a  Church,  a 
true  Church.     Had  he  any  regard  to  the  children  ? 
If  so,  what  ?     Did  his  scheme  include  them  ?     Did 
his  own  heart  embrace  them  ?     He  commanded  par- 
ents to  bring  them  to  him,  he  took  them  into  his 
arms,  he  blessed  them  ;  and   thus,  as  it  would  ap- 
pear, signalized  his  entering  into  everlasting  cove- 
nant with  them.     He  declared.  Of  such  is  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.     The  phrase  kingdom  of  heaven,  or 
of    God,    so  often  used   by   Christ,  does   not   refer 
directly  to  the  life  beyond  the  grave,  but  rather  to 
this ;  or  I  may  say  it  refers  to  that  through  this.     The 
immediate   kingdom   of  God  which   Christ  had  in 
mind  was  to  be  developed  here  on  the  earth.     It 
means,  however  we  view  it,  at  least  as  much  as  the 
word  Church.     I  think  it  stood  to  Christ's  mind  as 
synonymous  with  the  goodly  Church  he  would  plant 
and  foster  in  all  the  world.     If,  then,  children  belong 
to  the  Christian  kingdom  of  God,  they  certainly  be- 
long to  the   Christian  Church.     When  Paul  says, 
"  The  children  of  a  believer  are  holy,"  he  says  no 
more  than   Christ  affirmed,   that  "  they  are  of  his 
kingdom."     It  does  not  admit  of  a  doubt  that  the 
purposes,   scheme,    economy,    and   whole   heart    of 
Christ,  comprehended  the  children.     How  he  yearned 
and  agonized  for  such  a  result !  "  O  Jerusalem !  Jeru- 
salem !  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children 
together,  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her 
wings!"     This  may  mean  the  whole  people  of  the 
city,  but  it  certainly  must  signify  the  little  children 
also.     "  Forbid  them  not  to  come  unto  me."     "We 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  117 

are  not  to  throw  the  least  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the 
smallest  child  borne  in  its  mother's  arms  entering 
into  the  covenant  of  God  in  Christ ;  it  must  be  con- 
secrated, dedicated,  to  God,  to  Christ ;  and  if  so  con- 
secrated or  dedicated,  it  of  com'se  belongs  to  his 
Church.  The  idea  of  a  child  coming  to  Christ,  and 
being  declared  to  be  of  his  kingdom,  and  being 
blessed  by  him,  —  and  not  being  in  his  Church,  still 
remaining  outside  of  his  Church,  and  being,  as  we 
say,  in  the  world,  a  stranger  from  the  covenants  of 
promise,  —  is  a  simple  absurdity,  a  monstrosity. 

5.  My  fifth  argument  comes  from  the  w^ay  in  which 
the  Apostles,  after  Christ,  or,  as  we  sometimes  say, 
the  Apostolic  Church,  treated  children.  There  are 
the  declarations  already  cited  ;  first,  that  of  Peter, 
made  upon  the  very  introduction  of  himself  to  man- 
kind as  a  Christian  minister,  — "  The  promise  is 
unto  you,  and  to  your  children  "  ;  second,  that  of 
Paul,  who  takes  it  for  granted,  a  thing  which  nobody 
doubted  or  ever  thought  of  bringing  into  dispute, 
that  the  children  of  believers  were  holy.  And,  in 
reviewing  the  action  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  we 
must  not  disregard  the  final  injunction  of  Christ  to 
his  disciples,  "  Go,  teach  all  nations^  baptizing  them," 
&c.  It  is  well  argued  that  nations  must  include  the 
children  of  a  nation.  I  am  not  now  speaking  of  bap- 
tism, as  an  external  rite.  I  have  little  doubt,  the  real, 
deep,  efficacious  baptism  that  Christ  meant  was  a 
spiritual  baptism.  I  am  not  now  inquiring  whether 
infants  ought  to  receive  water-baptism.  The  point 
is,  whether,  with  or  without  baptism,  the  children  of 
the  Church  belong  to  the  Church.    Whether,  indeed, 


118  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

baptism  here  means  spiritual  influences  or  water  ap- 
plications, and  whether,  as  most  suppose,  it  is  a 
token  of  the  Christian  covenant  and  a  seal  of 
church -membership,  or  not,  whichever  way  we  look 
at  it,  it  would  seem  to  include  the  children.  Lydia 
was  baptized,  and  her  household,  or  family.  Paul 
baptized  the  household  or  family  of  Stephanas.  I 
am  not  going  to  affirm  there  were  children  in  these 
households.  The  presumption  is,  there  were ;  at  any 
rate,  the  whole  family,  more  or  less,  great  and  small, 
became  of  the  Christian  Church.  Paul  uses  this 
language :  Salute  the  church  that  is  in  such  or  such 
a  house,  or  family.  The  house  or  family,  parents 
and  children,  were  accounted  as  constituting  the 
church.  The  jailer  at  Philippi  believed  and  was 
baptized,  with  all  his  house.  The  Baptists  say,  there 
could  have  been  no  infants  in  that  family,  for  infants 
cannot  believe.  I  will  not  commit  the  folly  of  say- 
ing the  jailer  believed  for  his  children,  if  he'  had  any. 
I  do  say,  this  father,  as  every  father  ought  to  do,  ac- 
cepted Christ  as  the  Saviour,  Shepherd,  Divine  Head 
of  himself  and  his  children,  —  accepted  Christianity 
as  the  religion  of  himself  and  family,  and  took  all  his 
little  ones  with  him,  and  all  that  should  be  born  unto 
him,  into  the  new  covenant ;  and  if  there  was  a  babe 
of  but  a  day  old,  he  said  to  Paul,  take  that  too,  seal 
it  with  the  great  seal,  it  shall  grow  up  into  the  faith 
of  Jesus.  Again,  we  read  that  a  nobleman  of  Ca- 
pernaum believed,  with  all  his  house,  and  that  Cor- 
nelius feared  God,  with  all  his  house.  We  have  a 
dozen  or  more  instances  in  which  the  house,  the  en- 
tire family,  is  most  sacredly  connected  with  the  great 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  119 

movement  Christ  and  the  Apostles  were  starting  in 
the  world.  Now  those  have  undertaken  a  very  hard 
work,  who  shall  convince  me,  or  anybody,  that  there 
were  no  little  children  in  those  families.  The  pre- 
sumptions, the  known  facts  of  all  time,  are  against 
such  a  notion.  I  shall  claim  there  were  children 
there,  until  the  contrary  is  proved. 

Well,  these  children  were  included  in  whatever 
included  the  parents,  whether  we  call  it  the  Church, 
or  the  new  covenant,  or  the  Christian  system,  or 
what  not.  So  Christ  says,  "  This  day  is  salvation 
come  to  this  house."  To  show  this  church  connec- 
tion of  the  children,  the  Apostles  use  this  language 
of  spiritual  affection  and  Christian  fellowship  :  "  Sa- 
lute them  that  are  of  Aristobulus's  household  ; 
greet  them  that  be  of  Narcissus's  household."  Of 
course,  here  is  implied  the  Christian  and  church 
fraternization  and  communion  of  the  children.  Into 
whatever  house  the  Apostles  entered,  they  were 
directed  by  their  Master  to  say.  Peace  be  to  this 
house ;  peace,  harmony,  love,  benediction,  Christian 
harmony,  love,  benediction ;  this  was  to  be  their 
first  salutation,  first  address.  Again,  when  the  dis- 
ciples sold  their  possessions,  when  they  continued 
with  one  accord  in  the  temple,  when  they  went  daily 
from  house  to  house,  breaking  bread,  —  men  and 
women,  fathers  and  mothers,  —  in  the  nature  of  the 
case,  they  must  have  had  their  children  with  them. 

I  pass  now  to  the  direct  mention  of  children. 
John  writes  to  a  church  sister  thus :  "  The  elder  to 
the  elect  lady  and  her  children,  whom  I  love  in  the 
truth."     He  closes  in  these  w^ords  :  "  The  children  of 


120  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

thy  elect  sister,"  that  is,  the  children  of  my  wife,  my 
own  children,  "  greet  thee."  Again,  he  says,  "  I  re- 
joiced greatly  that  I  found  of  thy  children  walking  in 
truth."  Christianity  gradually  formed  itself  into  an 
institution  ;  it  developed  itself  in  what  I  have  called 
the  organization  of  the  Christian  religious  element, 
in  other  words.  The  Church.  As  w^e  say  of  our 
meetings,  of  any  sort,  it  came  to  order.  It  had  its 
officers,  its  bishops  or  pastors,  and  its  deacons  ;  and 
we  trace  at  once  an  intimate  church  connection  be* 
tween  these  church  officers  and  their  children.  The 
bishop  or  pastor  and  the  deacon  are  to  rule  well  their 
own  houses  and  children,  having  them  in  subjection 
with  all  gravity  or  soundness.  They  are  directed  to 
have  faithful  children,  children  of  the  Christian  faith. 
Then  Paul  wills  that  the  younger  Christian  or 
church  women  marry  and  bear  children.  These 
same  women,  now^  embraced  in  the  new  covenant, 
are  also  exhorted  to  love  their  husbands  and  their 
children.  By  and  by  the  Apostles  meet  these  assem- 
.  bled  Christian  families,  that  gradually  expand  into 
a  more  universal  Church,  and  see  how  he  addresses 
them  all  alike.  Parents,  he  says,  love  your  children  ; 
children,  obey  your  parents  in  the  Lord,  i.  e.  Christ ; 
as  Christian  children,  as  included  in  the  new  cove- 
nant, as  members  of  a  common  household  of  faith. 
So  he  says,  Wives,  as  we  now  say.  Christian  wives, 
church  wives,  submit  yourselves  unto  your  husbands ; 
husbands.  Christian  husbands,  cherish  and  nourish 
your  wives  even  as  your  own  flesh,  for  so  Jesus  cher- 
isheth  and  nourisheth  the  Church.  In  a  word,  the 
whole  household,  children  and  all,  is  now  presumed 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  121 

to  be  a  Christian  household,  and  are  all  gathered 
into  the  Church  together,  and  are  all  spoken  to  and 
treated  as  component  parts  of  one  great  spiritual 
communion. 

The  principle  is,  that  if  the  parents  are  believers, 
or  if  one  parent  is  a  believer,  the  children  are  holy. 
Or,  as  Solomon  expresses  it,  "  The  just  man  walk- 
eth  in  his  integrity;  his  children  are  blessed  after 
him."  Where  the  Apostle  is  writing  to  one  of  these 
entire  communities,  recently  formed,  as  in  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Ephesians,  for  instance,  we  find  it  addressed 
to  the  saints  at  Ephesus  and  the  faithful  in  Christ 
Jesus,  "  which  does  at  least  mean,"  argues  Dr.  Bush- 
nell,  "  that  the  Epistle  is  addressed  to  Christian  breth- 
ren. And  among  these,  '  children '  are  directly  ad- 
dressed in  the  same  way  as  other  members  of  the 
fraternity.  The  same  is  true  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Colossians,  wherein  we  see  children  familiarly  recog- 
nized with  their  parents  among  the  adult  Christian 
disciples,  and  addressed  in  the  second  person,  with 
as  little  thought  of  impropriety  as  the  adults  them- 
selves." I  submit,  without  further  citation,  that,  in 
the  Apostolic  times,  wherever  you  look,  in  all  that 
is  expressed  by  the  words  Church  arrangements, 
Church  privileges,  Church  distinctions.  Church  re- 
sponsibilities, the  children  were  included.  I  do  not 
know  nor  care  whether  Lydia  had  children  or  not ; 
the  whole  spirit  of  the  system  then  taking  its  rise  in 
the  world  includes  the  children.  The  Church  which 
we  see  the  Apostles  devoting  themselves  to  erect 
was  not  a  Masonic  Fraternity,  or  Odd  Fellows' 
Lodge  ;  it  was  like  the  State,  or  Commonwealth ;  it 
11 


122  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

was  indeed  a  new,  divine  Christian  state  and 
commonwealth,  in  which  the  promise  was  to  them 
and  to  their  children.  The  Apostles  labored  wholly 
in  the  spirit  of  the  old  covenant  with  Abraham, 
that  God  was  making  a  covenant  with  those  first 
believers  and  their  seed  after  them,  to  be  a  God  to 
them  and  their  seed  for  ever.  I  may  say  more ;  the 
people  of  those  times  knew  no  other  way  of  doing 
things  ;  God,  I  may  say,  had  trained  the  mind  of  the 
generations  to  no  other  modes  of  thinking;  to  no 
other  forms  of  action.  A  man  leaving  Judaism  or 
Paganism,  and  embracing  the  doctrine  of  Jesus,  on 
entering  the  Church,  took  his  wife  and  children  with 
him,  feeling  that  God  had  set  his  sanctuary  in  the 
midst  of  them,  that  he  should  dwell  therein,  and  his 
children,  and  his  children's  children,  for  ever.  Than 
this  idea  of  separating  parents  from  children  in  the 
fellowship  of  the  Church,  perhaps  you  could  con- 
ceive nothing  more  revolting  to  the  whole  Oriental 
mind,  Jewish  or  other,  which  always  cherished  with 
extremest  sacredness  the  parental  and  filial  ties,  and 
studied  to  secure  the  highest  blessings  to  the  children. 
My  last  —  argument,  I  was  about  to  say,  but  the 
subject  is  beyond  argument,  it  has  the  force  of  fore- 
gone sentiment  and  conviction,  —  the  last  illustration 
of  the  great  truth  I  have  endeavored  to  set  forth  is 
found  in  the  action  of  the  Christian  Church,  imme- 
diately subsequent  to  the  era  of  the  Apostles.  The 
records  of  that  period  are  few,  but  all  corroborative 
of  the  same  general  view.  Among  the  earliest  Chris- 
tian gravestones  is  one  commemorative  of  a  little 
child ;  it  is  inscribed  thus :    "  Here   lies  Zosimus,  a 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  123 

faithful,,  descended  of  faithfuls,  aged  two  years,  one 
month,  and  twenty-five  days."  Here,  as  in  a  pic- 
ture, the  whole  thing  is  seen.  That  little  child  was 
in  the  covenant  of  its  parents.  It  was  a  believer, 
descended  from  believers.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  one 
of  the  earliest  of  the  Christian  Fathers,  particu- 
larly commends  his  mother,  that  "  not  only  was  she 
herself  consecrated  to  God,  and  brought  up  under 
a  pious  education,  but  that  she  conveyed  it  down  as  a 
necessary  inheritance  to  her  children."  Clement  of 
Alexandria  describes  a  primitive  Christian  family 
in  these  words :  "  The  mother  is  the  theme  of  the 
children's  praise,  the  wife  is  the  theme  of  hei;  hus- 
band's praise,  while  God  is  the  theme  of  the  united 
praise  of  all."  (Neander,  p.  175.)  The  same  is  ex- 
pressed in  their  views  about  the  future  world : 
"  There  a  vast  multitude  of  them  that  are  dear  to 
us  await  us,  a  multitude  of  parents,  of  brothers,  of 
children."  As  the  "  Passover  had  been  the  funda- 
mental covenant  feast  of  the  Mosaic  religion,  and 
children  partook  of  it,  so  the  Lord's  Supper  be- 
came the  fundamental  covenant  feast  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  and  the  children  partook  of  it."  (Nean- 
der.) We  even  find  parents  frequently  giving  the 
sacred  emblems  to  their  own  children.  I  do  not 
know  as  it  admits  of  question,  that,  in  the  first  ages 
of  the  Church,  the  children  of  believers  were  all 
considered  as  of  the  Church ;  I  mean  prior  to  the 
fourth  century,  which  is  the  beginning  of  the  great 
Dark  Age  of  our  era.  At  a  later  period,  chil- 
dren were  received  into  the  Church  :  not  in  conse- 
quence of  birth   however,   but   solely   by   baptism. 


124  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

The  doctrine  of  Total  Depravity  had  sprung  up,  and 
this  at  once  unchurched,  unchristianized,  and  con- 
demned all  children.  But  there  was  not  wanting 
a  remedy  for  this  difficulty;  the  notion  was  con- 
ceived that  the  water  of  baptism  regenerated  the 
child;  and  so  children  recovered  their  standing  in 
the  Church  through  baptism.  An  unbaptized  infant 
was  out  of  the  Church,  out  of  the  covenant  of  grace, 
out  of  heaven,  and,  as  St.  Augustine  unequivocally 
taught,  was  damned  to  everlasting  perdition. 

Such  is  the  doctrine,  my  friends,  and  these  are  its 
proofs.  Such  is  a  portion  of  my  own  implicit  faith. 
Nor  is  the  view  here  advanced  without  confirma- 
tion ;  and  that,  too,  from  a  source  rather  unexpected. 
First,  Dr.  Bushnell's  book  on  Christian  Nurture  is 
really  founded  on  the  doctrine  I  have  endeavored  to 
unfold.  He  does  not  say  as  much  as  I  do,  or  speak 
so  plainly,  but  the  same  'train  of  thought  runs  all 
through  what  he  has  written.  The  object  of  his 
book  is  to  show,  in  his  own  words,  "  that  the  child 
is  to  grow  up  a  Christian."  That  too  I  believe. 
He  lays  no  substantial  basis  for  such  a  belief;  that  I 
have  endeavored  to  do. 

A  further  confirmation  is  afforded  in  a  little  book, 
entitled  "  The  Baptized  Child,"  by  the  Rev.  Nehe- 
miah  Adams,  of  Essex  Street  Church,  Boston,  a 
Calvinist.  Mr.  Adams  says,  speaking  of  Christ 
blessing  little  children,  "  If  Christ  referred  to  the 
Church  on  earth,  infants  have  in  his  view  a  certain 
relation  to  that  Church ;  and  this  relation  may  have 
such  meaning  and  benefit  in  it,  that,  if  they  die  in 
infancy,  they  are  transferred  to  heaven."     Infants, 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  125 

then,  have  a  relation  to  the  Church.  What  rela- 
tion ?  Such  that,  if  they  die,  they  go  to  heaven. 
This  is  a  pleasant  way  of  avoiding  the  real  point,  or 
of  not  exactly  saying  what  one  thinks.  That  rela- 
tion is,  that  infants  are  in  and  of  the  Church.  Again, 
Mr.  Adams  uses  this  very  strong,  very  significant 
language:  "  Children  were  formerly  included  with 
their  parents  in  promises  and  threatenings,  blessings 
and  curses.  This  is  a  principle  in  the  government 
of  the  world;  and  when  God  revived  his  Church  in 
Abraham,  this  principle  came  into  view  ;  and  the 
admission  of  children  into  covenant  with  their  par- 
ents was  grafted  upon  it.  It  has  its  foimdation  in 
our  nature^  and  cannot  cease  but  with  the  parental 
relation.  So  that  the  question  which  some  ask, 
^  Whether  the  Abrahamic  covenant  is  abolished,' 
is  lost  in  the  question.  Has  that  principle  of  the  Di- 
vine government  ceased,  upon  which  God  formerly 
included  the  children  of  believers  in  his  covenant 
with  their  parents?"  Has  that  principle  ceased, — 
a  principle  in  the  government  of  the  world,  founded 
in  our  nature,  and  which  cannot  cease  ?  Mr.  Adams 
is  apparently  in  a  dilemma,  and  discordant  with 
himself.  He  says  the  principle  cannot  cease.  But 
as  if  this  were  saying  too  much,  he  asks  if  it  can 
cease.  This  question  he  does  not  answer.  But  a 
more  important,  a  more  momentous  question,  has 
not  been  propounded  to  the  American  churches. 
Mr.  Adams,  however,  does  say  that  he  considers  it 
"  a  great  principle  in  God's  government  of  the  world, 
which  existed  even  before  the  Abrahamic  covenant, 
and  will  last  to  the  end  of  time,"  that  there  is  "  a  nat- 
11  * 


126  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

ural  connection  of  children  with  their  parents  in  the 
divine  constitution,"  in  other  words,  the  Church. 
This  really  expresses  the  whole  idea,  and  all  I  have 
said, — that  there  is  a  natural  connection,  a  birth- 
relation,  an  inherited  right,  of  children  to  the  Church  ; 
or  that  the  children  of  the  Church,  by  "  a  natural 
connection,"  belong  to  the  Church. 

Again,  Mr.  Adams  says,  "  God,  at  baptism,  re- 
ceives the  child  into  the  number  of  those  to  whom 
He  stands  in  a  peculiar  relation  "  ;  that  is,  in  plain 
words,  into  the  Church,  according  to  the  Calvinistic 
view  of  it.  He  adds,  that  parents,  when  they  join 
the  Church,  must  avouch  Jehovah  to  be  the  God 
and  portion  of  their  children,''^  a  thing  I  never  saw 
done  anywhere.  He  says  again,  "  If  God  has  not 
in  any  manner  signified  his  will  that  the  admission 
of  children  into  covenant  with  him  through  their 
parents  should  cease,  —  and  this  we  nowhere  find 
that  he  has  done,  —  the  baptized  child  is  of  course 
received  into  special  relation  to  God."  Here  Mr. 
Adams  wellnigh  asserts,  what  it  has  been  one  ob- 
ject of  this  discourse  to  prove,  that  the  principle  in- 
volved in  the  Abrahamic  covenant  has  never  ceased. 
Need  I  say  any  thing  more  ?  "Will  any  one  ques- 
tion the  soundness  of  my  views.  Yet  here  in  New 
England  the  principle  has  ceased,  practically  ceased 
everywhere.  INIr.  Adams,  addressing  the  baptized 
child,  says,  and  underscores  the  words,  "  God  looks 
upon  you  as  His  child^  your  parents  gave  you  to  Him 
\vhcn  you  were  baptized."  Mr.  Adams  says,  the 
pious  Israelite  had  great  comfort  in  the  fact  that 
his  children  were  included  in  the  covenant ;  and  he 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  127 

adds,  "  If  believers  now  do  not  enjoy  this  privilege," — 
they  certainly  do  not,  —  "  they  are  deprived  of  a  great 
blessing,  and  that  too  under  a  dispensation  which 
professes  to  be  superior  to  that  which  is  past,  in  the 
richness  of  its  blessings."  He  continues,  "  This  privi- 
lege is  not  restricted  to  one  age  or  dispensation ;  it 
grows  out  of  the  natural  relation  of  parents  and 
children.  When  God  would  mark  by  a  peculiar 
token  the  covenant  made  by  Him  with  believers.  He 
selected  the  natural  affection  of  parents  for  their  chil' 
dren^  and  as  it  were  sanctified  or  set  apart  this  instinct, 
to  be  a  sign  between  Him  and  them."  Mr.  Adams, 
in  these  extracts,  does  not  appear  consistent.  He  at 
one  time  makes  the  connection  of  children  with  the 
Church  turn  on  baptis7n,  and  at  another  he  says  this 
relation  has  its  foundation  in  nature,  the  ^^  natural  con- 
nection of  children  with  their  parents  in  the  divine 
constitution."  The  idea  and  import  of  baptism  I 
shall  by  and  by  recur  to.  I  am  now  simply  asking. 
What  is  the  foundation  of  the  children's  relation  to 
the  Church?  It  is  not  baptism;  that  is  another 
thing.  I  conceive  it  to  be,  as  Mr.  Adams  again  and 
again  admits  that  it  is,  the  same  as  it  is  in  the  state 
and  the  family,  the  natural  connection  between  par- 
ents and  children. 

I  have  a  few  explanations  to  make. ,  I  have  used 
the  word  hereditary,  I  think  I  am  not  misunder- 
stood. I  do  not  mean  that  personal  character  is  hered- 
itary, I  do  mean  that  that  ivhich  is  potent  in  forming' 
personal  character  is  hereditary.  I  do  not  mean  that 
virtue  is  hereditary,  I  do  mean  that  the  supports  and 
incentives  to  virtue  are  hereditary.     I  do  not  mean 


128  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

that  regeneration  is  hereditary ;  I  do  mean  that  the 
divine  means  and  method  of  regeneration  are  heredi- 
tary. I  say  the  Church  is  hereditable,  as  I  say  the 
State  is ;  and  that  there  is  no  other  foundation  for 
the  perpetuity  of  either.  The  Bible  is  hereditary, 
the  Sabbath  is  hereditary.  This  that  we  call  Christ 
Church  is  an  heritage ;  this  building,  or  some  other 
in  its  place,  we  shall  transmit  by  natural  succession 
to  our  children,  as  we  have  received  it  from  our 
fathers ;  this  worship  is  conveyed  in  like  manner,  the 
influence  of  this  church,  its  organic  life,  our  princi- 
ples, our  truths,  our  liberality,  the  form  and  fashion 
of  our  thoughts,  we  likewise  send  down.  In  the 
State  we  inherit  the  constitution  and  laws,  the  rights 
and  privileges  of  our  fathers.  In  the  State  they 
designed  that  we  should,  they  covenanted  to  this 
very  extent.  In  the  Church  we  have  no  such  cove- 
nant. Both  in  State  and  Church,  we  often  all  live 
at  the  same  time,  old  and  young,  parents  and  chil- 
dren, testators  and  heirs,  to  enjoy  these  blessings  in 
common. 

There  are  the  terms  believers,  Christians,  the  Church, 
—  how  would  I  have  them  used?  There  is  every 
shade  of  belief;  all  kinds  of  believers.  I  certainly  do 
not  mean  by  believers  the  little  company,  here  or  any- 
where, who  to-day  may  unite  in  the  Lord's  Supper. 
I  trust  they  are  believers ;  but  there  are  more  be- 
sides. The  great  majority  of  this  congregation,  as 
to  the  fundamental  truths  of  Christianity,  are  be- 
lievers, to  the  extent  that  all  the  duties  and  obliga- 
tions of  Christianity  may  be  predicated  of  their  be- 
lief. And  that  is  belief  enough  for  the  true  Church 
theory  to  proceed  upon. 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  129 

•'  Christians,^'  —  who  are  Christians  ?  I  shall  quote 
from  the  report  made  to  the  New  York  Legislature 
on  a  petition  for  abolishing  all  laws  pertaining  to  the 
Sabbath  ;  a  report  evidently  suggested  by  Calvinistic 
clergy,  and  drawn  up  by  Calvinistic  laity.  It  says  : 
"  This  is  a  Christian  nation.  Ninety-nine  hundredths, 
if  not  a  larger  portion  of  the  population,  believe  in 
the  general  doctrines  of  the  Christian  religion  ;  Chris- 
tianity is  the  common  and  prevailing  faith  of  the 
people,  it  is  the  common  creed  of  the  people."  Now 
in  whatever  sense  it  be  true  that  we  are  a  Christian 
nation  or  a  Christian  people,  just  in  that  sense  do 
all  Christian  responsibilities  on  the  one  hand,  and 
Christian  privileges  on  the  other,  belong  to  us.  Just 
to  that  extent  are  we  all,  parents  and  children,  in- 
cluded in  the  Christian  covenant,  just  to  that  extent 
are  we,  as  were  the  Jews,  a  holy  people  unto  the 
Lord  our  God ;  whether  the  sense  be  loose  or  strict, 
high  or  low,  it  matters  not,  as  to  the  argument  be- 
fore us. 

"  Chiirch,^"^  —  how  is  that  word  to  be  understood  by 
us  in  the  practical  application  of  this  discourse  ?  how 
the  phrase,  "  The  children  of  the  Church  belong  to 
the  Church "  ?  Certainly  not  as  an  exclusive  de- 
scription of  a  small  band  of  communicants,  but  as  it 
is  used  in  the  declaration,  "  We  are  the  Church  "  ; 
meaning  all  who  are  willing  to  be  embodied  in  that 
formula,  whether  they  are  communicants  or  not^ 

So  important,  my  friends,  do  I  deem  the  doctrine 
of  this  discourse,  so  unquestionable  does  the  truth  of 
it  appear,  so  clearly  is  it  revealed  alike  in  all  history, 
in  nature,  in  Scripture,  and  the  craving  wants  of  our 


130  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

best  men,  so  clearly  is  it  of  God  and  a  part  of  the 
Divine  economy  in  the  government  of  the  world,  that 
I  could  not,  for  a  moment,  consent  to  assume  the 
pastorate  of  any  church  that  did  not  recognize  it.  I 
do  not  think  I  magnify  the  subject  under  any  im- 
mediate impressions  of  contact  with  it,  or  from  any 
sort  of  idiosyncrasy  of  feeling  or  speculation ;  and  I 
am  disposed  to  say  that  no  subject,  or  hardly  any 
subject,  can  be  proposed  to  the  consideration,  at  least, 
of  the  New  England  churches,  of  magnitude  and 
moment  like  this.  It  really  underlies  the  whole  mat- 
ter of  Christian  nurture  and  general  religious  educa- 
tion ;  it  underlies  the  whole  matter  of  the  method  of  a 
bishop  or  pastor  with  his  people,  and  of  the  Church 
with  whatever  comes  within  its  sphere.  It  is  in  itself 
a  complete  basis  of  church  action  towards  the  young. 
It  determines  the  mode  in  which  the  Christian  min- 
ister is  to  address  his  people,  and  the  light  in  which 
he  is  to  view  them.  Are  the  children  in  covenant  with 
their  parents,  or  out  of  covenant?  That  is  the  ques- 
tion we  have  got  to  meet.  If  they  are  in  covenant,  our 
duty  to  them  is  one  thing  ;  if  out  of  covenant,  our  duty 
is  quite  another  thing.  If  in  the  latter  case,  I  do  not 
say  the  children  are  actually  different,  but  we  look  on 
them  in  wholly  another  light,  they  assume  an  oppo- 
site and  contrasted  phase. 

You  know  how  the  case  now  is,  —  the  children  are 
generally  out  of  covenant  of  the  Christian  Church. 
Does  any  evil  result  from  this  ?  Consult,  if  you  will. 
Dr.  Bushnell's  book.  He  says,  "  Our  children  grow 
up  in  sin,  artificially  averse  to  religion.  Our  fam- 
ilies are  irresponsible,"  —  and  he  might  have  added, 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  131 

our  churches  are  irresponsible.  "  Our  piety  is  itself 
desiccated  as  it  is  undomesticated,  and  whatever 
progress  we  make  is  wrought  by  methods  that  are 
desultory  and  violent,  and  remote  as  possible  from  all 
the  natural  laws  of  character.  In  short,  the  mischiefs 
we  suffer  are  too  evident  to  be  suffered  longer.  The 
day  has  come  when  God  calls  us  to  undertake  a 
remedy."  You  know  how  it  is,  —  the  children  of  the 
Church  are  all  out  of  the  Church,  out  of  the  cove- 
nant ;  neither  the  privileges  nor  the  duties  of  the 
Church  or  the  covenant,  or  of  Christ,  are  supposed 
to  rest  upon  them.  The  idea  is,  that  if  we  can 
specially  convert,  transmute,  make  over  these  children, 
then  they  can  be  taken  into  the  Church  and  the 
covenant.  And  this  idea  practically  prevails  just  as 
much  in  Unitarian  churches  as  in  any  other.  The 
notion  has  been  branded  into  the  American  mind, 
that,  to  use  the  common  phrase,  one  must  meet  with 
a  change  before  he  can  enter  the  covenant,  take  upon 
himself  the  obligations  of  a  Christian  life,  or  even 
partake  of  the  communion. 

The  doctrine  of  total  depravity,  I  hardly  need  to  say, 
is  the  fountain-head  of  all  this  notion.  This  doctrine 
at  once  unchurches  the  whole  human  race,  as  repre- 
sented in  a  whole  generation  of  children.  The  Ro- 
manists get  over  the  difiicalty  by  saying  water  re- 
generates. Our  modern  Calvinists  see  the  absurdity 
of  this,  yet,  still  cleaving  to  total  depravity,  they  only 
fall  into  deeper  mire.  Revivals  are  invoked  to  pre- 
vent the  extinction  of  the  Church.  Dr.  Bushnell 
sees  evils  enough  in  them.  He  does  not  strike  at 
the  root  of  the  tree,  he  does  not  deny  depravity,  but 


132  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

he  strikes  boldly  for  this :  "  We  must  educate  the 
children  into  piety,  we  must  treat  them  as  in  the 
covenant "  ;  and  he  writes  a  book,  devoted  to  prove 
this  thesis  :  "  That  the  child  is  to  grow  up  a  Chris- 
tian." He  says  of  his  book,  "  It  was  like  a  fuse 
hissing  from  a  bomb,  that  threw  the  whole  State  of 
Massachusetts  into  a  general  panic."  Mr.  Adams 
says,  "  God  looks  upon  the  baptized  child  as  his 
child."  Dr.  Bushnell  says,  the  child  is  in  the  Church, 
is  presumptively  regenerated.  Paul  says,  the  chil- 
dren of  believers  are  holy. 

Now  the  question,  I  grant,  may  not  be  a  question 
of  the  absolute  nature  of  the  child,  but  this :  "  How 
shall  we  look  upon  children."  If,  as  Mr.  Adams 
says,  God  looks  upon  the  baptized  child  as  his  child, 
certainly  you  and  I  may ;  if  Dr.  Bushnell  may  re- 
gard the  child  as  presumptively  regenerate,  you  and 
I  may ;  if  Paul  regarded  them  as  holy,  so  may  we. 
Even  leaving  out  the  fact,  the  presumption  in  this 
case  is  every  thing.  The  man  whom  I  traffic  with 
to-morrow  morning  may  be  a  dishonest  man  ;  but  I 
have  to  presume  one  thing,  either  that  he  is  honest 
or  dishonest,  and  it  is  of  all  consequence  which 
course  I  take.  One  of  you,  professing  to  be  my 
friend,  may  knowingly  give  me  a  counterfeit  bank- 
bill;  the  presumption  is,  you  will  not.  The  Jews 
were  not  all  holy,  as  Paul  says,  "  For  they  are  not  all 
Israel  that  are  of  Israel " ;  they  were  presumptively 
holy.  So  after  Christ,  Christians  and  their  descend- 
ants, from  generation  to  generation,  are  presump- 
tively holy. 

This  pre su7nption,  what  does  it  amount  to  ?    I  will 


THE   -CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  133 

take  Dr.  Bushnell's  illustration.  You  look  upon  a 
kernel  of  wheat ;  that  kernel  contains,  presumptive- 
ly, a  thousand  kernels  of  wheat;  if  planted,  the  pre- 
sumption is,  it  will  grow  and  bear  fruit.  There  is, 
however,  a  possibility,  owing  to  some  fault  of  culti- 
vation, or  some  speck  of  diseased  matter  in  itself, 
it  may  never  reproduce  at  all.  He  applies  this  to  the 
Christian  nurture  of  children.  If  properly  trained, 
the  presumption  is,  they  will  grow  up  Christians. 
So,  if  Christian  parents  were  faithful,  the  presump- 
tion would  be  that  ninety-nine  hundredths  of  these 
children  of  America  would  be  growing  up  Christians. 
So  if  the  Christian  Church  embraced  the  children, 
the  presumption  would  be  that  all  the  children  of 
the  Church  would  grow  up  Christians.  What  a 
truth  is  here  for  the  consideration  of  these  parents, 
and  for  our  consideration  as  a  Church ! 

Here  comes  in  the  doctrine,  the  only  reasonable 
doctrine,  of  imputation.  Imputation, —  it  means  what 
the  presumption  is  in  regard  to  men,  what  the  light 
in  which  we  shall  regard  them.  I  have  a  friend  at 
a  distance;  he  is  an  educated,  refined,  virtuous,  and 
honest  man, —  a  Unitarian,  if  you  please.  He  sends 
his  son,  whom  I  never  saw  or  heard  of,  to  me.  Now 
I,  instinctively,  irresistibly,  impute  the  character  of 
that  father  to  that  son.  I  may  be  mistaken,  but  I 
look  upon  him  in  the  light  of  his  father.  I  some- 
how, without  knowing  any  thing  about  the  matter, 
presume  him  to  be  refined,  virtuous,  and  honest,  and 
a  Unitarian,  and  I  approach  him,  address  him  in  this 
light.  It  is  in  this  way  the  righteousness,  the  good- 
ness, the  virtues  of  Christ,  are  imputed  to  believers. 
i2 


134  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

Now  the  Bible  imputes  the  righteousness  of  Abra- 
ham to  his  descendants,  and  of  Christ  to  his.  In 
this  sense  Abraham  becomes  the  federal  head  of 
the  Jews,  and  Christ  of  Christians.  Now  granting 
that  Adam  fell,  yet  our  relations  are  not  with  him. 
Abraham,  and  after  him  Christ,  is  our  federal 
head. 

We  reach  another  great  point.  The  children  of 
the  Church  belong  to  the  Church,  but  "  we  must  be 
born  again,"  we  must  have  the  spiritual  birth  ! 
Children  are  to  be  regenerated  in  the  Churchy  and 
not  out  of  it.  It  is  absurd  to  say  a  man  must  be 
regenerated  out  of  the  Church  and  then  join  it.  It 
is  like  saying  one  must  get  an  education  and  then 
begin  to  go  to  school.  If  Christ  be  in  the  Church, 
and  he  is  in  the  true  Church,  if  the  Church  be  the 
body  of  Christ,  then  the  place  for  the  sinning  man 
to  find  Christ  is  in  the  Church,  and  not  out  of 
it.  If  the  true  law,  as  Dr.  Bushnell  insists,  is  nur- 
ture, then  the  place  to  receive  that  nurture  is  in  the 
Church,  and  not  out  of  it.  The  Church,  the  true 
Church,  is  the  mother  of  her  children,  and  is  to  train 
and  bring  them  up  within  herself,  as  the  mother  of 
a  family.  What  would  you  think  of  a  mother,  who, 
as  fast  as  her  children  were  born,  should  send  them 
out  into  the  world,  as  it  were  disinherit  them,  say 
they  were  not  of  her  home  and  heart,  and  yet  say,  As 
soon  as  my  children  become  truly  affectionate  and 
kind,  and  full  of  filial  duty,  I  will  admit  them  to  the 
house  ?  This  is  the  way  the  so-called  churches  are 
treating  their  children,  and  in  fact  losing  them;  it  is 
only  here  and  there  they  can  get  one  back  into  the 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  135 

Church  from  which  in  infancy  they  are  so  unnatu- 
rally excluded. 

"  You  want  to  get  us  all  into  the  Church,"  says 
some  one.  So  I  do,  into  the  true  Church,  the  Church 
of  God  and  Christ,  the  Church  of  the  universe,  of 
humanity,  of  progress,  of  all  that  is  lovely,  beautiful, 
glorious.  But  suppose  the  child,  as  he  grows  up, 
becomes  dissatisfied,  and  wants  to  leave?  If  he 
really  wants  to  leave  the  true  Church,  I  should  be 
sorry  for  him.  If  he  wants  to  leave  any  particular 
instance  of  that  Church  for  some  other,  with  prayers 
and  blessings  we  should  let  him  go.  If  he  really 
wishes  to  fall  back  into  the  world,  sin,  and  shame, 
why,  he  must  do  it,  and  we  should  leave  him  and 
the  consequences  with  God. 

In  respect  to  the  baptism  of  children  I  have  but  a 
word  to  say.  It  is  the  seal  or  token  of  their  being  in 
the  Church  ;  it  is  the  outward  impress  of  the  cove- 
nant. The  Jews  circumcised  their  children,  the  Ro- 
mans changed  their  dress,  the  Greeks  registered  their 
names,  the  Christian  Church  baptizes  its  children. 
It  is  a  beautiful,  an  appropriate  rite,  hallowed  by  the 
usages  of  many  ages,  hallowed  by  all  the  associations 
of  Christian  sentiment.  Some  may  say.  We  our- 
selves have  not  been  baptized,  we  are  not  outwardly 
recognized  as  of  the  Church,  and  will  you  baptize 
our  children  ?  Yes,  your  children,  as  many  as  can 
be  oflered.  Possibly  you  may  be,  unconsciously, 
members  of  the  Church,  and  of  course  we  should 
baptize  your  children.  Perhaps  you  may  be  very 
wicked  men,  and  most  certainly  we  should  baptize 
your  children,  because,  on  the  very  theory  of  our  sub- 


136  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

ject,  if  this  is  the  true  Church,  it  is  anxious  that  its 
selectest  influences  should  be  about  your  children ;  it 
is  anxious  to  take  them  into  its  own  solemn  cove- 
nant with  God ;  it  is  anxious  for  their  growth  into 
Christianity,  and  it  feels  that  within  itself,  cer- 
tainly, if  not  in  your  family,  the  work  of  your  chil- 
dren's regeneration  and  gracious  advancement  may 
go  on.  The  Church,  the  true  Church,  would  take  the 
child  of  a  wicked  man  into  its  communion  and  fel- 
lowship, just  as  quick  as  it  would  into  its  Sunday 
School.  Nor  is  this  with  us  a  matter  of  sentiment 
or  feeling,  nor  is  it  any  finesse,  or  sectarian  device ; 
it  is  a  matter  of  profoundest  conviction,  of  most  fun- 
damental principle  ;  it  goes  as  deep  as  our  theology 
or  our  Christianity  goes,  it  is  an  incorporate  part  of 
the  whole  system  of  our  religious  faith  and  practice. 
Therefore  we  say  to  each  of  you  who  has  an  unbap- 
tized  child.  Bring  him  to  the  altar,  and  if  you  have 
it  not  in  your  heart  to  consecrate  him  to  God,  and 
surrender  him  to  the  responsibilities  and  hopes  of 
the  Gospel,  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  Church  to  do  it 
for  you.  If  the  believing  wife  sanctifies  the  husband, 
may  we  not  judge  that  the  believing  child  will  retro- 
actively sanctify  the  parents  ?  If  there  be  any  adult 
persons  who  have  not  been  baptized,  we  hope  they 
will  present  themselves  to  receive  that  rite. 

There  is  a  secondary  rite,  known  in  the  Romish 
and  other  churches  as  Confirmation ;  it  is  a  period 
when  the  child,  having  arrived  at  years  of  discretion, 
takes  upon  itself  the  covenant  of  the  Church  and 
God.  Dr.  Bushnell  suggests  for  our  Congregational 
churches,  that  it  be  the  rite  of  Assumption  or  Ac- 


THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE.  137 

knowledgment,  as  being  an  assuming  or  acknowl- 
edging the  covenant.  That  rite  in  due  time  will  be 
solemnized  in  this  Church. 

Kecollect,  in  regard  to  the  communion  or  sacra- 
ment of  the  Lord's  Supper,  it  is  not  specially  obli- 
gatory on  a  few  individuals,  who  in  technical  phrase 
have  joined  the  Church.  There  is  a  man,  an  excel- 
lent man,  we  presume,  who  keeps  this  ordinance ; 
there  is  his  wife,  an  excellent  woman,  she  is  under 
just  the  same  obligations  to  keep  it.  Any  man  who, 
as  Abraham  did,  believes  in  God,  or  who  loves 
Christ,  or  feels  that  he  is,  in  any  sense,  of  the  true 
Church,  should  deem  it  a  privilege  to  participate  in 
this  celebration.  Do  we  bind,  does  the  true  Church 
bind,  any  man's  soul,  or  hinder  his  independence,  or 
mesh  his  activities  ?  God  forbid.  Every  man  here 
is  free  as  God  would  have  him  be,  free  as  his  own 
nature  virtuously  developed  would  desire  to  be.  Is 
he  a  scientific  man  ?  the  Church  goes  w4th  him  into 
the  vast  domain  of  the  universe.  Is  he  a  politician  ? 
the  State  is  holy,  and  holily  to  be  administered ;  the 
true  Church  is  in  harmony  with  the  true  State,  and 
the  Church  blesses  the  State.  The  churchman  and 
the  statesman  are  in  unity.  The  Church  only  asks 
of  the  State,  what  God  asks,  and  nature  asks,  and 
humanity  pleads  for,  that  it  would  not  sin.  Does 
any  one  want  to  have  recreation  ?  God  has  given 
you  that  want,  and  the  Church  recognizes  its  sacred- 
ness,  and  the  Church  is  just  as  willing  her  children 
should  play,  as  she  expects  them  to  pray. 

If  the  Church  be  that  body  of  which  God  is  the 
supreme  head,  and  Christ  the  vital  heart,  and  the 

12* 


138  THE    CHURCH    HEREDITABLE. 

Holy  Spirit  the  cementing  element,  then  the  Church 
is  just  as  vast,' as  all-comprehensive,  as  liberal,  as 
humane,  as  genial,  as  God  and  Christ  and  the  Sa- 
cred Spirit  are.  If  this  Church  be  any  feeble  repre- 
sentative of  the  great,  universal  Church,  then  it  com- 
bines within  itself  all  these  most  exalted  elements. 
If  it  be  not  the  true  Church,  God  forbid  it  should 
last  another  day  ;  if  it  be  not,  God  to-day  help  us  to 
make  it  so. 

Three  thousand  and  eight  hundred  years  ago,  the 
Lord  appeared  to  Abram  in  the  plains  of  Mamre, 
and  said  unto  him,  "  I  am  the  Almighty  God ;  walk 
before  me,  and  be  thou  perfect,  and  I  will  make 
my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and  will  mul- 
tiply thee  exceedingly."  And  Abram  fell  on  his 
face. 


SEEMON    VIII 


WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO   HEAVEN,  BUT  DARE   NOT 
ADMIT  THEM  TO  THE  CHURCH. 

JESUS  CALLED  THEM  UNTO  HIM,  AND  SAID,  SUFFER  LITTLE  CHIL- 
DREN TO  COME  UNTO  ME,  AND  FORBID  THEM  NOT:  FOR  OP 
SUCH   IS  THE   KINGDOM   OP   GOD.  —  Luke  Xviii.  16. 

When  a  little  child  dies,  we  say  it  has  gone  to 
heaven.  We  rejoice  in  this,  we  could  be  satisfied 
with  nothing  else.  This  not  only  our  hearts  demand, 
but  our  reason  confirms ;  with  this,  all  our  ideas 
of  God  and  Christ  harmonize.  We  not  only  feel 
that  it  must  be  so,  but  our  doctrine  definitely  asserts 
it.  We  predicate  heaven  of  childhood  not  in  spite 
of  our  articles  of  faith  ;  rather  it  is  one  of  the  Unita- 
rian, the  Christ- Church  tenets,  that  children  go  to 
heaven.  We  have  no  embarrassment  on  this  sub- 
ject, no  other  notions  we  entertain  throw  a  shadow 
of  doubt  on  this.  In  the  fulness,  the  exactness,  in 
all  the  rigor  of  the  Unitarian  faith,  standing  at  the 
centre  of  our  system,  we  affirm  and  feel  this. 

The  Unitarian  faith,  beginning  in  God  as  the 
central  unity,  is  unitary,  harmonious,  throughout. 
It  takes  in  the  whole  of  humanity  and  the  whole  of 
divinity.     Hence,  as   a  system,  it  is  complete  and 


140  WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO    HEAVEN, 

beautiful  as  that  of  the  astronomic  world.  It  does  not 
say  to  a  mother,  agonized  at  the  death  of  her  child, 
bleeding  in  all  the  depths  of  her  affections,  "  True, 
you  wish  to  think  your  child  has  gone  to  heaven, 
true,  your  maternal  desires  would  carry  it  to  the  bosom 
of  its  God ;  you  wish  ever  after  to  imagine  it  happy. 
We  pity  you ;  we  will  pray  for  you ;  but  we  must 
be  cautious  what  we  say.  We  know  all  are  born  in 
sin ;  we  know,  without  a  change  of  nature,  none  can 
find  salvation.  We  hope,  in  some  way  we  cannot 
explain,  that  the  atoning  blood  of  Christ  will  avail 
for  your  child  ;  but  we  do  not  know,  we  have  no 
assurance ;  we  must  submit,  leave  all  to  God,  and  be 
as  easy  as  we  can." 

No.  We  say,  God,  the  one  God,  in  whose  one- 
ness, in  whose  entire,  unitary  universe  all  things  are 
embraced,  —  this  our  God,  we  say,  loves  the  mother 
and  loves  the  child,  and  even  sent  Jesus  to  tell  us 
how  much  God  loves  little  children.  He  has  placed 
an  immortal  soul  in  the  child's  body,  and  undying 
instincts  of  devotion  and  tenderness  in  the  mother's 
breast;  and  God  loves  the  soul  of  the  child  he  has 
made,  and  loves  the  heart  of  the  mother  he  has  filled 
with  instincts,  and  loves  to  have  mothers  love  their 
children,  and  has  made  it  a  part  of  the  eternal  laws 
of  his  own  great  unitary  kingdom,  that  there  should 
be  this  mutual  love ;  and  when  the  child  dies,  we 
say  God  still  keeps  hold  of  the  child  he  has  made, 
still  embraces  in  his  great  unitary  scheme  the  little 
one  into  whom  he  breathed  the  breath  of  life.  In  a 
word,  he  takes  it  to  heaven ;  and  to  these  deep  ma- 
ternal yearnings  he  says,  "  You  may  love  your  child 


BUT  DARE  NOT  ADMIT  THEM  TO  THE  CHURCH.   141 

still ;  these  irresistible  emotions  are  all  prophecies  of 
a  reunion  ;  in  other  worlds,  in  other  stages  of  being, 
they  shall  all  be  satisfied.  One  God,  one  love  of 
God,  one  purpose  of  God,  one  jurisdiction  of  God, 
reign  throughout  the  universe,  and  these  shall  make 
mother  and  child  one  again."  Unitarianism,  or  the 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  unity,  leads  directly  to  this, 
that  children  go  to  heaven ;  indeed,  it  is  as  a  broad 
path  in  which  little  children  are  conducted  to  the 
abodes  of  bliss. 

"  Go  to  heaven"  ;  —  what  is  this  ?  Heaven  is  the 
holiest  place  in  the  universe,  it  is  the  most  beautiful, 
the  most  sacred.  It  is,  at  least,  a  state  where  the 
selectest  influences  prevail,  where  the  general  atmos- 
phere is  clearest  and  purest.  It  is  the  nearer  presence 
of  God,  it  is  where  Christ  most  personally  appears, 
it  is  where  angel  and  archangel  are,  and  w^iere  the 
best  people  of  whom  we  can  conceive  are  congre- 
gated. This  is  where  little  children  go ;  and  we 
sometimes  conceive  that  angels,  whose  ministry  is 
that  of  good,  take  charge  of  the  little  ones,  and  feed 
them  with  immortal  food,  and  clothe  them  with 
immortal  habiliments,  and  lead  them  by  the  crystal 
brooks.  And  we  most  fondly  think  of  Christ,  as  he 
did  when  upon  earth,  taking  them  into  his  arms  and 
blessing  them,  and  saying.  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
God.  And  it  seems  to  us  sometimes  as  if  the  old 
saints  gathered  about  what  indeed  died  here,  but  is 
as  a  new-born  child  there,  welcoming  it  to  its  new 
position  and  its  untold  felicity. 

We  are  happy  to  have  it  so;  we  feel  that  our  child 
is  safe,  that  it  will  be  taken  care  of,  that  it  is  gar- 


142  WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO    HEAVEN, 

nered  in  the  everlasting  fold ;  and  wherever  we  go 
upon  the  earth,  however  wide  may  be  our  wander- 
ings, or  deep  our  engrossments,  or  tried  our  lot,  we 
feel  that  our  child  is  sheltered  and  secure  in  that  spot 
which  we  call  heaven.  This  thought,  I  say,  cheers 
and  sustains  us ;  we  would  not  have  it  otherwise,  we 
rejoice  that  the  child  of  our  loins  has  entered  the 
very  centre  of  sanctity  and  goodness  in  all  the  uni- 
verse. 

This  is  all  right,  this  is  just  as  it  should  be,  we 
say;  we  are  glad  that  our  faith  leads  to  these  con- 
clusions, and  confirms  such  a  result.  We  would  not 
have  our  child  out  of  that  holy  place  which  we  call 
heaven,  out  of  that  inner  sanctuary  that  the  spirit- 
ual world  is  to  us,  for  any  thing.  We  sometimes 
speak  as  if  our  children  ought  to  go  to  heaven,  as  if 
there  were  no  other  place  in  the  realms  of  thought 
fit  for  them.  We  know  the  waywardness  and  fol- 
lies of  childhood,  but  oh !  every  mother  feels  as  if 
heaven  were  not  too  good  for  her  child.  If  it  were 
suggested  that  such  or  such  a  one  was  a  bad  boy, 
the  mother  replies,  "  He  will  be  better  in  heaven ;  he 
was  not  naturally  bad,  and  he  had  so  many  virtues ! 
heaven  is  the  true  place  to  develop  his  character." 

So,  I  say,  when  the  child  dies,  these  feelings  come 
in  and  we  are  comforted.  We  not  only  believe  that 
God  is  just  and  good,  but  that  his  justice  and  good- 
ness extend  to  the  comprehension  of  the  soul  and 
the  everlasting  destiny  of  our  own  little  ones. 

Very  well,  all  well,  all  reasonable,  proper,  and  gra- 
cious. But  look  at  another  thing.  Look  at  that 
which  stands  quite  contrasted  with  what  we  have 


BUT  DARE  NOT  ADMIT  THEM  TO  THE  CHURCH.   143 

been  speaking  of.  When  a  child  is  born,  what  do 
we  do  with  it  ?  Do  we  feel  that  it  belongs  to  the 
Church,  that  it  is  born  into  the  Church,  that  it  enters 
the  Church,  that  it  is  a  member  of  the  Church  ?  O 
no !  "We,  or  at  least  the  great  mass  of  Christians, 
feel  that  their  children  are  born  into  the  world,  born 
out  of  the  Church.  They  feel  that  the  Church  is  too 
good,  too  holy  a  place,  an  institution,  or  position  for 
their  children  to  be  in.  They  hope,  if  their  children 
grow  up  and  get  a  new  nature^  then  they  will  join 
the  Church.  But  if  they  should  die,  why,  they  be- 
lieve their  children  will  go  to  heaven  just  as  they  are. 
They  will  go  to  heaven  if  they  die,  but  yet  here,  as 
they  are,  they  are  unfit  for  the  Church  !  The  popular 
superstition  on  this  subject,  for  I  can  really  give  it 
no  milder  name,  virtually  makes  the  Church  holier, 
purer  than  heaven  I 

Take  the  popular  idea  of  the  Church,  such  as  pre- 
vails in  all  New  England,  that  it  is  a  special  collec- 
tion of  people,  a  small  but  sacred  body,  within  what 
is  called  the  Society,  and,  as  is  everywhere  under- 
stood, you  have  a  community  of  good  men  and 
women  ;  they  are  called  saints,  or  sanctified  ones, 
they  are  all  supposed  to  have  new  natures.  God  is 
thought  to  be  in  a  peculiar  manner  with  them,  the 
Holy  Spirit  dwells  especially  in  their  hearts,  they 
are  conformed  to  Christ's  image,  they  pray,  they  love. 
In  every  parish  is  such  a  circle,  which  is  thought  to 
be  the  centre  of  sanctity,  a  kind  of  Holy  of  Holies 
here  on  the  earth.  Let  us  suppose  for  a  moment 
that  the  theory  is  true,  that  they  are  all  really  saints, 
while  the  rest  of  mankind  are  sinners.  * 


144  WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO    HEAVEN, 

Now  let  a  child  be  born  in  one  of  the  parishes,  let  it 
be  born,  if  you  will,  to  these  church-members,  these 
reputed  saints,  and  what  will  you  do  with  that 
child  ?  where  will  you  put  it  ?  Will  you  put  it  into 
the  Church,  to  be  integrally  a  part  and  parcel  of  it  ? 
Or  will  you  put  it  into  the  world,  to  be  part  and 
parcel  of  that  ?  One  or  the  other  you  must  do,  you 
always  do.  The  child,  according  to  invariable  and 
omnipotent  usage,  at  birth,  enters  either  the  Church 
or  the  world.  Will  you  cause  it  to  grow  up  a  Church 
child,  or  will  you  let  it  grow  up  as  it  may,  with  the 
hope  that  it  will  some  time  or  other  join  the  Church  ? 
Practically,  there  is  no  question  as  to  what  you  will 
do,  as  to  what  everybody  does  here  in  America. 
They  would  shudder  at  the  idea  of  deeming  the  child 
to  be  in  the  Church. 

Yet  when  the  little  one  dies,  we  say  it  has  gone 
to  heaven!  We  put  it  there  in  our  imagination, 
our  hearts,  our  hope.  We  cannot  bear  to  think  of 
its  going  anywhere  else.  And  even  those  people 
who  have  the  narrowest  and  most  pharisaic  notions 
about  the  Church  are  everywhere  trying  to  make 
themselves  believe  their  children,  when  they  die,  go 
to  heaven.  Here  truly  is  something  to  marvel  at,  to 
weep  over,  if  there  were  any  to  sympathize  with  your 
tears.  And  what  is  the  reason  of  this  conduct  ?  Ask 
yourselves.  Why,  the  Church  is  so  sacred  a  place, 
so  holy  a  community,  people  think  it  would  not  be 
right  to  let  their  little  children  belong  to  it ;  it  would 
seem  a  kind  of  profanity  to  put  them  into  it.  The 
Church  is  taken  for  a  kind  of  type  of  sanctity.  It  is 
called  Zion  ;  it  is  supposed  to  be  God's  peculiar  heri- 


BUT  DARE  NOT  ADMIT  THEM  TO  THE  CHURCH.   145 

tage,  it  is  the  centre  of  selectest  influences,  and  we 
dare  not  place  our  children  in  it.  It  is  the  type  of 
sanctity,  I  say.  But  what  are  the  elements  of  its 
sanctity  ?  Are  they  any  higher  or  purer  than  those 
of  heaven  ?  Are  they  in  any  essential  degree  differ- 
ent ?  I  am  willing,  for  the  argument's  sake,  to  sup- 
pose the  idea  of  the  Church  everywhere  prevalent  to 
be  perfectly  true,  that  it  is  the  seat  of  highest  sanc- 
tity ;  and  then  I  ask.  Is  it  higher  than  heaven's  sanc- 
tity? God,  God's  spirit,  Christ,  holiness,  purity, 
love,  obedience,  these  are  supposed  to  be  in  the 
Church  ;  they  are  in  heaven  also. 

Are  you  willing,  father,  that  your  little  boy,  or 
mother,  that  your  little  girl,  should  be  of  the  Church  ? 
If  you  feel  as  most  parents  do,  you  say.  No.  But  let 
your  little  boy  or  your  little  girl  die ;  and  you  say, 
"  Our  child  has  gone  to  heaven  !"  Now  heaven  is 
really  only  more  sacred,  pure,  and  beautiful  than  the 
Church  ;  that  is  the  fact  about  it. 

Some  may  say,  "  The  Church  is  so  bad  we  wull  not 
put  our  children  into  it."  This  is  not  the  common 
idea,  it  is  not  the  idea  we  have  to  combat.  The 
common  idea  is,  "  The  Church  is  too  good  to  put  our 
children  into  it.  We  do  not  certainly  know  as  they 
will  grow  up  good  children,  and  it  would  be  dreadful 
to  have  them  grow  up  bad  children,  and  at  the  same 
time  be  in  the  Church." 

But  I  want  to  inquire  how  you  can  expect  your 
children  to  grow  up  good,  if  they  are  not  in  the  good 
place,  or  become  holy,  reverent,  if  they  are  not  in  the 
holy,  reverent,  sacred  place.  If  you  would  teach 
your  child  to  swim,  you  put  him  in  the  water  ;  if  you 

13 


146  WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO    HEAVEN, 

would  have  him  healthy,  you  place  him  where 
the  air  is  healthful ;  if  you  would  have  him  a  skilful 
mechanic,  you  put  him  where  mechanics  are  taught 
most  skilfully ;  if  you  would  have  him  an  accom- 
plished merchant,  you  put  him  where  the  mercantile 
art  is  best  understood  ;  if  you  would  have  him  polite 
in  manners,  you  like  to  have  him  go  amongst  the 
most  mannerly  people  ;  if  you  would  have  him  rise 
to  high  rank  as  a  sailor,  you  send  him  to  sea.  When 
you  would  have  him  good,  pious.  Christian,  you  keep 
him  farthest  possible  from  those  who  represent  the 
highest  goodness,  purity,  Christ-likeness,  the  Church  ! 

"  But  there  is  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  our  chil- 
dren might  become  communicants  of  the  body  and 
blood  of  their  Lord!  "  And  what  if  they  did?  Is 
there  anything  dreadful  about  that  ?  If  they  die,  are 
they  not  to  eat  of  the  fruits  of  Paradise,  drink  of 
what  is  typified  as  the  new  wine?  Are  they  not 
even  as  little  children  to  be  brought  into  special 
communion  with  Christ  in  the  next  world  ? 

I  need  not  pursue  the  subject.  I  hardly  have  a 
heart  to.  Only  1  think  we  cannot  fail  to  see  and 
feel,  not  only  how  heretical,  how  irrational,  but  how 
terribly  diseased  and  grossly  erroneous,  is  public  sen- 
timent everywhere  touching  the  Church,  and  espe- 
cially touching  the  relation  of  children  to  the  Church. 

I  thought  of  these  things  the  other  day,  when  I 
was  called  to  bury  a-  little  child.  The  mother  felt 
her  little  one  had  gone,  as  we  say,  to  a  better  world. 
And  I  felt  so  too.  But  was  that  mother  ever  will- 
ing her  children  should  go  into  what  is  deemed  the 
best   portion   of  this  world,  the    Church  ?      On   so 


BUT  DARE  NOT  ADMIT  THEM  TO  THE  CHURCH.   147 

solemn  an  occasion,  I  would  not  indulge  in  bitter 
thoughts,  or  venture  painful  suggestions.  Only  T 
cannot  forbear  asking,  O  ye  fathers  and  mothers ! 
what  are  ye  doing  with  your  children  ?  God  sends 
them  away  into  the  heavenly  world,  ^nd  you  rejoice 
there  is  a  heaven,  holy  and  pure,  for  them  to  go  to. 
Christ,  so  to  say,  stands  at  the  door  of  his  Church, 
and  asks  them  to  come  in,  and  no  parent  is  willing. 
A  child  is  born  here  on  the  earth,  helpless,  weak, 
undeveloped,  unperfected,  liable  to  fall,  liable  to  sin. 
What  will  you  do  with  it?  Where  will  you  put  it? 
Now,  I  say,  if  there  be  a  holy  spot,  a  holy  community, 
a  holy  sphere  on  the  earth,  or  a  holiest,  I  would  put  the 
child  into  it.  If  the  Church  be  that  holy  spot,  then  the 
child  shall  go  into  that.  The  primary  holy  place  for 
the  child  is,  indeed,  the  family ;  but  the  great  univer- 
sal holy  place  is  the  Church.  Or  rather,  all  families 
should  be  church  families,  and  so  all  children  church 
children.  If  the  family  be  a  bad,  an  irreligious  one, 
then  all  the  more  should  its  children  be  gathered  into 
the  Church.  If  Zion,  or  the  Church,  be  where  God 
most  peculiarly  dwells,  of  all  places,  the  children 
should  dwell  there  too.  If  Christ  be  bread  from  heav- 
en, most  peculiarly  should  he  be  bread  for  the  children. 
If  he  be  the  Shepherd  of  his  people,  most  peculiarly 
should  he  be  the  Shepherd  of  the  little  children.  If 
the  Church  be  the  body  of  Christ,  most  peculiarly 
should  the  children  be  of  it.  If  the  Church  consist 
of  pious  men  and  women,  regenerate  men  and  wo- 
men, of  persons  who  pray,  who  do  not  lie  or  steal,  or 
profane  the  name  of  God,  then  that  is  the  place  of 
all  others  for  the  children.     If  the  Church  feeds  on 


148  WE    SEND    CHILDREN    TO    HEAVEN,   ETC. 

Christ,  in  a  higher,  truer  sense  than  the  world  does, 
then,  on  all  accounts,  let  the  children  taste  that  im- 
mortal, that  divine  food,  that  they  may  grow  thereby. 
If  there  is  less  sin  in  the  Church  than  in  the  world, 
then,  whenever  a  child  is  born,  we  should  at  once 
feel  that  its  true  place  is  in  the  Church,  rather  than 
in  the  world. 


SERMON   IX. 


CHILDREN   TO  BE   COMMUNICANTS. 

HE  SHALL  FEED  HIS  FLOCK  LIKE  A  SHEPHERD  ;  HE  SHALL  GATHER 
THE  LAMBS  WITH  HIS  ARM,  AND  CARRY  THEM  IN  HIS  BOSOM, 
AND  SHALL  GENTLY  LEAD  THOSE  THAT  ARE  WITH  YOUNG. — 

Isaiah  xl.  11. 

This  language  is  thought  to  be  prophetical  of 
Christ.  It  may  refer  to  Christ,  or  the  Christian 
Church,  or  the  Christian  ministry.  At  least,  it  is 
pertinently  and  beautifully  exemplified  in  the  con- 
duct and  precepts  of  Jesus.  While  he  was  instruct- 
ing the  parents,  he  took  the  little  children,  the  lambs, 
into  his  arms.  His  last  words  to  his  disciples  were, 
"  Feed  my  sheep,"  "  Feed  my  lambs."  In  short,  the 
sentiment  of  the  passage,  whether  considered  in  its 
prophetic  intent  or  evangelical  exemplification,  is, 
that  the  ChristiaH  organization  comprehends  parents 
and  children  alike.  In  the  spirit  of  this  entire  unity 
of  position  and  privilege,  pervading  all  ages  and  con- 
ditions of  a  given  community,  the  prophet  wrote,  and 
our  Saviour  acted.  Even  the  unborn  are  not  forgot- 
ten ;  but,  as  if  the  covenant  of  grace  anticipated  the 
possibilities  of  being,  its  providence  and  forethought 

13* 


150  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

extend  to  the  future,  and,  like  a  guardian  angel,  direct 
into  the  way  of  life  the  generations  as  they  rise. 
This  is  a  fundamental  law  of  the  moral  universe ;  it 
is  the  principle  by  which  God  has  administered 
human  affairs.  It  obtained  in  the  Jewish  dispen- 
sation ;  it  was  adhered  to  by  the  Founder  of  the 
new. 

In  what  is  here  involved  is  contained  a  part,  a 
most  essential  part,  of  all  my  ideas  of  the  Church, 
the  true  Christian  Church.  The  principle  familiarly 
stated  is  this  :  Lambs  follow  the  sheep.  However 
we  treat  the  sheep,  so  we  treat  the  lambs.  If  we 
can  find  a  sweeter  pasture  or  a  clearer  stream  where 
we  will  lead  the  sheep,  there  we  will  lead  the  lambs 
also.  Here  you  have  the  germ,  the  paradigm,  the 
illustration  and  philosophy  of  all  my  theory  of  the 
Church.  Lambs  follow  the  sheep,  children  their  par- 
ents. If  parents  feed  on  the  heavenly  bread,  children 
feed  on  heavenly  bread  ;  if  parents  commune  with 
Jesus,  children  commune  with  Jesus ;  if  parents 
keep  the  Sabbath,  children  keep  the  Sabbath;  if 
parents  love  God,  children  are  to  love  God.  And 
this  from  very  necessity  of  nature,  this  from  the 
law  of  birth.  Lambs  follow  the  sheep  because  they 
are  lambs ;  children  follow  their  parents  because 
they  are  their  children,  and  fundamentally  for  no 
other  reason.  In  more  precise  terms,  if  sheep  are 
in  the  fold,  the  lambs  are  in  the  fold ;  if  parents  are 
in  the  Church,  children  are  in  the  Church.  Lambs 
do  not  get  into  the  fold  because  the  shepherd 
performs  any  ceremony  upon  them,  or  they  pass 
through  any  change ;  they  are  there  because  they 


CHILDREN   TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  151 

are  born  there.  Children  do  not  get  into  the  Church 
because  of  baptism^  or  any  permission  of  the  Churchjv 
or  any  formula  that  may  be  pronounced ;  they  are 
there  because  they  were  born  there.  Just  as  chil- 
dren are  in  the  State  and  in  the  Family  by  birth,  so 
are  they  in  the  Church. 

This  is  common  sense,  this  is  sound  philosophy ; 
it  is  also  the  Bible  from  one  end  to  the  other.  "  Feed 
my  sheep,"  says  Jesus,  "  Feed  my  lambs."  Peter 
exhorts  us  to  feed  the  flock  of  God.  Paul  enjoins, 
"  Take  heed  to  all  the  flock,  and  feed  the  Church  of 
God."  The  Church  of  God  and  the  flock  of  God  are 
the  same.  A  flock  is  made  up  of  sheep  and  lambs. 
Now,  I  am  called  a  pastor^  that  is,  a  shepherd  ;  and 
what  is  my  flock  ?  You  are  all  my  flock,  men,  wo- 
men, and  children.  The  children  are  just  as  much, 
just  as  integrally,  just  as  essentially,  of  the  flock  as  the 
parents.  Well,  I  must  feed  you  all  alike,  give  one  as 
good,  as  pure,  as  heavenly  food  as  another.  The  only 
difference  will  be,  I  shall  simplify  the  food  for  the 
lambs,  or  the  children.  I  feed  you  on  Christ,  on  his 
truth,  his  blessedness,  his  spirit,  his  emblems ;  and  I 
must  feed  the  children  just  as  I  do  the  parents.  If 
there  is  any  doubt  about  what  my  flock  is,  that,  in- 
deed, is  another  question.  Show  me  what  my  flock 
is,  and  you  define  at  once  the  sphere  and  the  nature 
of  my  duties.  You  say  such  or  such  a  one  is  not 
of  my  flock.  That  may  be.  But  let  me  say,  I  con- 
sider all  who  are  in  the  habit  of  worshipping  in 
Christ  Church  my  flock.  And  my  church,  that  over 
which  God  hath  made  me  overseer,  is  coextensive 
and  uniform  with  my  flock.     Now  will  you  allow 


152  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

that  this  or  that  man  or  woman  belongs  to  my 
flock?  Then  I  shall  insist  that  their  children,  whom 
they  bring  hither,  are  my  flock  also,  and  if  my  flock, 
then  my  church. 

Some  say  they  do  not  understand  the  word  church 
in  the  sense  in  which  we  use  it.  This  word  flock 
very  neatly  and  very  comprehensively  defines  it.  A 
flock  is  a  certain  number  of  sheep  under  the  care  of 
one  man,  or  who  receive  natural  food  from  one  man's 
hand.  A  church,  speaking  of  things  in  detail,  is  a 
certain  number  of  people  that  receive  spiritual  food 
from. one  man's  hand.  If  a  minister,  then,  wants  to 
know  what  his  church  is,  he  has  only  to  see  what  his 
flock  is.  If  there  is  any  one  present  who  comes  not 
to  be  fed,  but  for  sinister  and  extraneous  purposes, 
of  course  he  is  not  of  our  flock  or  our  church.  If 
any  one  —  man,  woman,  or  child  —  is  here  for  spirit- 
ual food,  for  religious  growth  and  culture,  such  a 
one  is  of  the  flock  and  of  the  church.  I  know  no 
church  that  is  made  up  of  only  a  small  part  of 
the  flock.  I  have  no  food  for  one  that  I  have 
not  for  another  ;  none  for  parents  that  I  have  not  for 
children.  There  are  no  partition-walls  within  Christ 
Church,  no  negro  pews,  no  alien  pews.  Christ 
Church  is  its  own  wall.  Within  here,  it  is  an  open 
area  of  position,  privilege,  and  duty. 

What  is  the  object  in  feeding  sheep?  That  they 
may  live  and  grow.  What  is  the  object  in  feeding 
people  ?  That  they  may  live  and  grow.  Without 
food  we  starve  and  perish.  Without  spiritual  food 
we  starve  and  perish.  A  Christian  pastor  feeds  his 
flock,  his  church,  that  they  may  live  and  grow.     He 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  153 

feeds  parents  and  children  all  alike,  for  the  same 
great  end.  We  need  life,  spiritual  life,  in  other 
words,  spiritual  health  and  strength,  and  we  cannot 
have  health  and  strength  unless  we  eat.  Our  souls 
need  to  grow,  all  our  faculties  want  maturing,  our 
whole  being  should  attain  to  the  stature  of  perfect 
men  in  Christ  Jesus.  In  order  that  we  may  grow  well, 
that  we  may  have  the  very  best  health  and  strength, 
we  need  the  best  food.  Children,  or  the  lambs,  need 
just  as  choice  food  as  the  parents,  or  the  sheep ; 
there  is  no  difference. 

What  is  the  design  of  this  whole  Church  system  ? 
Why  do  you  build  a  meeting-house  ?  why  have  a 
minister  ?  why  assemble  at  stated  seasons  ?  It  is 
that  you  may  have  true  life,  that  your  deepest  nature 
may  be  developed,  that  you  may  be  strengthened  for 
every  good  word  and  work,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  may 
more  and  more  pervade  you  ;  in  brief,  that  you  may 
become  good,  and  better  men  and  women  and  chil- 
dren. So  that  the  whole  design  of  the  Christian 
Church  touches  the  young  as  much  as  the  old. 

Lambs,  we  say,  are  born  into  the  fold,  and  children 
are  born  into  the  Church  ;  and  being  there,  we  know 
at  once  what  to  do  with  them.  We  are  to  feed  them. 
And  we  see  at  once  what  the  whole  Church  system  is 
for.  It  is  to  feed  these  lambs,  these  children,  that  they 
may  grow  up  Christians,  or,  if  you  will,  good  men 
and  good  women.  We  would  save  them  from 
starving  and  perishing.  Lambs  are  not  born,  and 
then  thrown  out  of  the  fold ;  neither  are  children 
born  to  be  thrown  out  of  the  Church ;  for  if  it  were 
so,  we  should  not  have  anything  to  do  with  them. 


154  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

Lambs  follow  the  sheep ;  children,  their  parents ; 
they  are  never  to  be  separated.  When  parents  are 
in  a  Church  relation,  then  are  the  children  also.  If 
it  were  not  so,  if  they  were  separated,  then  we  could 
not  feed  them  alike. 

Now  Christ  says,  "  I  am  the  bread  from  heaven ; 
he  that  eateth  me  shall  live  by  me."  If  here  is  a 
parent  who  eats  that  bread  and  lives  that  life,  his 
children  must  eat  the  same  bread  and  live  the  same 
life.  There  is  no  difference.  Christ  says,  "  I  am  the 
vine,  and  ye  are  the  branches."  If  here  is  a  parent 
who  is  a  branch,  his  children  are  parts  of  the  branch, 
twigs,  if  you  will,  or  buds,  and  all  alike  abiding  in 
Christ.  Christ  gives  us  water,  of  which  if  a  man 
drink  he  shall  never  thirst.  The  children  need  to 
drink  that  water  just  as  much  as  lambs  need  milk. 
Christ  says,  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me."  If 
parents  must  do  a  particular  thing  in  remembrance 
of  Christ,  so  must  the  children.  If  the  parents  must 
love  God  and  their  neighbor,  so  must  the  children. 

You  say  that  I  make  all  the  people  in  and  of  the 
Church,  church-members,  to  use  a  word  nowhere 
found  in  Scripture.  So  I  do.  But  there  are  bad 
people  here !  Now  let  us  understand  each  other. 
The  whole  object  —  or  at  least  it  is  sufficient  for  my 
present  purpose  to  say  the  whole  object  —  of  the 
Church,  its  Sabbaths,  its  ordinances,  its  influences,  is 
the  attainment  of  spiritual  life  in  Christ  Jesus,  or  to 
educate  Christians.  Now  the  primary  question  is, 
not  whether  there  are  good  or  bad  persons  here. 
The  primary  question  is.  Are  we  here  for  the  purpose 
just  indicated?     If  so,  then   my  duty   is   clear.     I 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  155 

must  SO  teach  and  pray  and  act  as  to  aid  you  to  grow- 
up  living,  healthful  Christians.  If  there  are  any 
here  for  other  purposes,  for  foreign  and  wholly  differ- 
ent purposes,  —  if  there  are  parents  here,  and  if  par- 
ents have  their  children  here,  for  reasons  that  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  great  end  of  our  being  here, 
why,  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  such  persons  to-day. 
I  have  nothing  to  say  to  them.  I  am,  so  to  say, 
feeding  out  Jesus  Christ  to-day  ;  and  if  there  are 
those  here  who  do  not  want  this  heavenly  food,  pray, 
do  not  blame  me  for  giving  it  to  those  who  do. 
These  others  are  certainly  not  my  flock  nor  my 
church.  I  regard  all  my  flock  and  my  church, —  all, 
I  say,  old  and  young,  — who  seek  the  food  it  is  the 
province  of  a  Christian  pastor  to  give. 

We  have  been  accustomed  to  conceive  of  the 
Church  as  a  select  and  ordinarily  small  body  of  adult 
persons,  who  had  met  with  a  change,  professed  relig- 
ion, communicated  at  the  Lord's  table,  were  in  cov- 
enant wdth  God  and  one  another,  and  would  proba- 
bly go  to  heaven  when  they  should  die.  For  one  to 
join  the  Church  was  a  notable  event,  something  that 
everybody  talked  about.  The  act  of  joining  w^as 
scenic  and  solemn.  We  have  been  so  trained  to  this 
idea,  we  can  hardly  think  of  the  Church  as  anything 
else.  But  this  is  a  very  imperfect  idea  of  the  Church, 
and  practically  most  pernicious. 

The  Church  is  the  body  of  the  good,  in  heaven  and 
on  earth,  whose  supreme  head  is  God.  The  Church, 
again,  is  a  body  of  people  associated  to  worship 
God  through  Christ.  It  is,  again,  by  courtesy  of 
language,  a  building  in  which  such  people  meet  to 


156  CHILDREN   TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

worship.  More  particularly  and  pointedly,  the  Church 
expresses  that  fundamental  form  of  human  society 
in  which  mankind  unite  as  religious  beings,  for  the 
worship  of  God,  growth  in  grace,  and  the  promo- 
tion of  righteousness.  This  last  describes  just  what 
we  are  to-day ;  that  divinely  ordained  form  of  human 
society  in  which  men  meet  for  these  sacred  purposes. 
What  is  most  striking  is  that  we  all  meet,  —  all  ages, 
conditions,  sexes.  Herein  we  see  how  the  Church  is 
analogous  to  the  other  two  great  forms  of  human 
society,  the  Family  and  the  State.  These  comprise 
all  ages,  conditions,  and  sexes.  Herein  you  see  how 
the  Church,  together  with  these  other  two  orders, 
is  separated  and  distinguished  from  all  other,  the 
transient  forms  of  human  society.  You  go  to  a 
corporation  meeting,  there  are  only  men  there ;  you 
go  to  a  sewing-circle,  there  are  only  women  there ; 
you  go  to  a  school,  there  are  are  only  children  there ; 
you  go  to  a  party,  there  are  only  invited  guests 
there ;  you  come  to  what  we  call  the  Church,  and 
there  is  everybody  here,  men  and  women,  old  and 
young,  parents  and  children,  rich  and  poor.  Parents 
and  children,  I  say,  parents  with  their  children ;  par- 
ents own  pews  in  which  the  whole  family  sit. 

Well,  then,  you  all  are  the  Church,  all  who  meet  in 
this  godly  way,  parents  and  children.  The  children 
are  just  as  much  the  Church  as  the  parents.  This 
building  in  which  we  meet,  except  by  courtesy  of 
speech,  is  not  the  Church,  not  the  real  Church,  but 
the  people  who  habitually  assemble  here  for  religious 
purposes  are  the  Church.  The  smallest  child  here 
is  just  as  much  a  part  of  the  Church  as  the  gray- 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  157 

headed  man.  In  this  view  you  see  at  once,  not 
only  how  narrow,  but  how  exceedingly  false,  is  the 
common  view  of  the  Church.  It  calls  only  a  select 
portion  of  those  who  habitually  assemble  for  relig- 
ious purposes  the  Church,  and  all  the  others,  the 
vast  majority,  it  calls  no-church,  the  world.  But 
worse  still,  in  that  limited  number  called  the  Church 
are  no  children!  Fatal,  dreadful,  most  inhuman 
mistake.  Parents  belong  to  it,  join  it,  but  do  not 
take  their  children  with  them  ;  never,  never,  in  vir- 
tue of  their  being  their  children.  Lambs  do  not 
follow  the  sheep,  nor  children  parents.  Parents  do 
dress  their  little  children  to  come  to  meeting,  as  we 
say;  they  bring  them  into  this  public  meeting-place, 
they  seat  them  orderly  in  these  pews.  Why  ?  Why  ? 
In  virtue  of  their  being  their  children.  This  is  the 
governing  law.  But  when  they  unite  with  the  Church, 
as  we  say,  go  forward  to  the  Lord's  table,  —  in  a 
word,  the  moment  parents  really  enter  what  is  called 
the  Church,  the  sacred  fold, —  they  leave  their  children 
behind;  they  separate  from  their  children.  The 
Church  system  that  everywhere  prevails  destroys  the 
sacred  unity  of  the  family,  breaks  up  the  God-or- 
dained law,  that  in  religiotis  matters  children  follow 
their  parents,  violates  the  sacred  integrity  of  the 
family. 

We  will  have  no  such  Church,  we  will  be  no 
such  Church.  We  will  recognize  the  Divine  con- 
dition of  things  ;  we  will  throw  ourselves  back  on 
the  polity  of  God ;  we  will  conform  to  the  unerring 
statutes  of  reason  and  revelation.  We  are  a  differ- 
ent Church  from  all  that.      We,  this  worshipping 

14 


158  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

congregation,  this  regularly  constituted  assembly, 
this  sober  and  religious  convocation,  —  we,!  say, 
these  husbands  and  wives,  these  brothers  and  sis- 
ters, these  children  and  children's  children,  are  a 
Church ;  we,  the  whole  of  us,  who  meet  in  Christ's 
name,   and  no  particular  few,  are  the   Church. 

Now  what  about  the  Communion  ?  This  is  w^hat 
I  say;  it  is  for  the  whole  Church,  and  not  for  a  part 
of  it.  See  how  the  matter  stands.  We,  the  Church 
called  Christ  Church,  have  a  holy  day,  called  the 
Sabbath,  a  holy  house,  called  a  sanctuary;  we  have 
holy  ordinances,  worship,  instruction,  singing,  bap- 
tism, and  the  Communion.  Well,  all,  for  all.  This 
is  our  maxim  and  law;  all  for  all.  But  shall  the 
children  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ?  Strange,  in 
this  nineteenth  century  of  our  religion,  to  hear  such 
a  question ;  stranger,  that  any  reasonable  mind  can 
doubt  on  the  point!  But  so  it  is,  the  question  is 
asked,  doubts  are  felt.  I  answer,  Yes,  of  course.  I 
answer  this  unhesitatingly,  unqualifiedly.  Not  only 
does  my  theory  lead  to  such  a  result,  but  my  convic- 
tions side  with  it.  Nay,  I  would  have  the  children 
partakers  of  the  holy  Communion,  if  it  upset  every 
theory  I  could  frame.  Feed  my  sheep,  feed  my 
lambs;  lambs  follow  the  sheep, children  their  par- 
ents, all  for  all,  there  is  no  difference.  As  did 
Judah  of  old,  so  on  this  interesting  occasion  ought 
we  all  to  stand  before  the  Lord,  with  our  wives, 
our  little  ones,  and  our  children.  When  Christ  says, 
"  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me,"  if  he  means  any- 
body, anybody,  he  means  the  children.  If  Christ 
is  bread  from  heaven  to  any,  he  is  so  to  the  children. 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  159 

If  these  emblems  typify  the  bread  that  he  is  to  our 
souls,  they  typify  it  to  the  children.  We,  the  Church, 
give  the  Sabbath  to  our  children,  as  to  all  others, 
and  expect  them  to  keep  it;  we  give  the  Bible  to 
our  children,  and  expect  them  to  revere  it ;  we  give 
public  w^orship  to  them,  and  expect  them  to  engage 
in  it;  so  we  must  give  the  Lord's  Supper  to  our 
children,  or  we  are  recreant  to  every  principle  of 
duty,  reason,  and  religion. 

I  know  we  may  imagine  our  children,  are  not 
prepared  for  the  communion.  And  why?  Solely, 
my  friends,  because  we  have  not  prepared  them,  by 
training  them  up  to  it,  and  in  it.  I,  your  minister, 
am  to  blame  in  this  ;  ye  parents  are  to  blame  ;  an 
erroneous  sentiment  is  everywhere  to  blame.  Sup- 
pose you  had  never  given  your  children  the  Sabbath 
until  by  some  special  change  they  were  prepared 
for  it,  and  had  brought  them  up  outside  of  the  Sab- 
bath, as  we  have  educated  them  outside  of  the 
Communion.  Why,  they  never  would  be  prepared 
for  it.  So  of  the  Bible,  so  of  prayer,  so  of  the  sun- 
light, so  of  roses.  The  true  and  only  way  to  pre- 
pare children  for  the  greatest,  holiest,  best  things  of 
experience  or  of  observation,  of  this  world  or  an- 
other, is  to  bring  them  up  in  those  things. 

But  the  sacrament  of  tlje  Lord's  Supper  is  more 
holy  than  these  other  things.  I  deny  that  it  is  one 
whit  more  holy  than  the  Sabbath,  or  the  Bible,  or 
prayer.  But  granting  that  it  were  ;  let  us  suppose, 
for  argument's  sake,  it  were  much  more  holy,  a  hun- 
dred times  more  holy,  the  holiest  thing  in  the  uni- 
verse.   Blessed  be  God  !  that  is  the  very  thing  I  want 


160  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

the  children  to  have,  that  is  just  what  I  would  give 
to  the  children,  I  was  going  to  say,  sooner  than  to 
anybody  else.  Show  me  what  is  most  holy,  most 
pure,  most  heavenly,  and  I  will  show  you  what 
children  most  need.  He  was  blessed  who  gave  a 
cup  of  cold  water  in  Christ's  name  to  the  little  one. 
Doubly  blessed  he  who  shall  give  the  cup  symbolical 
of  the  very  life  of  Jesus  to  the  little  ones.  Children 
receive  truth  through  pictures  more  than  adults. 
These  emblems  are  a  species  of  pictures  perhaps  of 
greater  utility  to  the  children  than  to  their  parents. 
Did  not  Christ  live  and  die  for  children  ?  and  shall 
we,  dare  we,  refuse  to  them  that  in  which  his  living^ 
and  dying  are  shown  forth  ? 

In  Washington,  they  are  erecting  a  monument  to 
the  memory  of  that  great  name.  If  you  were  in 
Washington  with  your  family,  you  would  account 
it  a  sin  to  refuse  to  take  your  children  with  you  to 
see  that  monument.  If  there  were  a  class  of  people 
there  who  taught  that  children  and  others  must  first 
meet  with  a  change  before  they  could  be  deemed 
patriots,  and  permitted  to  see  the  monument,  you 
would  exclaim,  with  astonishment.  Why,  let  your 
children  behold  the  monument,  that  they  may  be- 
come patriots.  In  this  sacrament  Christ  has  erected 
a  kind  of  monument  of  himself.  It  is  a  very  ancient 
monument,  one  of  rare  grace  and  finish,  and  covered 
with  touching  images  and  inscriptions.  And  he 
says,  Visit  it,  behold  it,  in  remembrance  of  me.  Will 
you  not  take  your  children  with  you  ?  Of  course 
you  will.  If  any  say.  The  children  must  first  meet 
with  a  change,  must  first  become  Christians,  before 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  161 

they  can  behold  the  monument  of  Christ ;  you  will 
reply,  We  bring  them  to  the  monument  that  they 
may  be  Christians,  that  Christianism  may  be  deep- 
ened in  their  hearts.  The  State  does  well  to  have 
its  monuments,  the  Church  does  well  to  have  its 
monuments.  But,  indeed,  how  much  better  the 
State  does  by  its  children  than  the  Church  has  ever 
done  ! 

Why  did  Christ  die  ? ,.  To  save  men,  we  say.  And 
to  save  children  ?  Then,  of  course,  children  should 
commemorate  his  death.  But  more  particularly,  the 
immediate  object  of  his  death  was  to  extend  the 
covenant  blessings  of  God  to  the  whole  human  race, 
and  to  the  children,  of  course.  Therefore  should  the 
children  commemorate  his  death.  Or  thus,  Christ 
died  a  sacrifice  to  his  grand,  divine  purpose  of  good 
to  man.  His  whole  life  was  devoted  to  such  a  pur- 
pose, and  in  his  death  it  was  consummated.  In 
all  this,  and  in  all  that  pertains  to  it,  children  are 
equally  interested  with  others.  Shall  we,  dare  we, 
in  the  Sunday  school,  teach  the  affecting  story 
of  the  great  Redeemer's  love  and  toils  and  agony, 
and  deny  to  them  the  memorials  of  those  things  ? 
God  forbid! 

If,  as  some  imagine,  the  Lord's  Supper  be  a  saving 
ordinance,  if  it  peculiarly  gathers  within  itself  the  life 
of  Christ,  if  his  spirit  there  gushes  and  flows  and  per- 
vades all  who  partake  of  it,  then  by  all  means  let  the 
children  come.  If  it  be  a  sacred  scene,  a  sweet  spot, 
a  gracious,  comforting,  sustaining,  sanctifying  rite, 
then  by  all  means  bring  the  children  to  it.  If  Christ 
be    nearer  his   people  there  than   elsewhere,  if  his 


162  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

voice  be  heard  there,  his  presence  felt,  if  his  bleed- 
ing side  be  open  there,  or  his  benignant  countenance 
appear  there,  as  nowhere  else,  then,  O,  then  let  the 
children  be  brought  nigh  I 

It  was  a  most  searching,  truthful,  and  beautiful  idea 
of  the  old  father,  Irenseus,  that  Christ  passed  through 
all  ages  of  man  that  he  might  save  all  by  himself,  in- 
fants and  little  ones,  and  youths  and  persons  ad- 
vanced in  years.  We  hardly  realize  that  Christ  was 
once  a  little  child  like  these  children,  a  good  little 
child,  and  that  these  are  to  become  good  by  him. 
He  is  a  child  for  the  children,  as  well  as  a  man  for 
the  men.  And  therefore  should  the  children  keep  all 
the  tender,  affecting  memorials  of  himself.  "  He  was 
made  an  infant  for  infants,  that  he  might  sanctify 
infants  ;  and  for  little  ones  he  was  made  a  little  one, 
to  sanctify  them  of  that  age  also."  The  case  is  this. 
We  and  our  children  are  a  church,  "  we  and  our  pos- 
terity," it  matters  not  how  far  the  succession  de- 
scends ;  it  is  one  church  still,  the  Church  of  God  and 
Christ.  As  a  church,  we  have  a  church-house,  or 
meeting-house,  church  days  or  meeting  days,  a 
church  pastor,  church  service,  church  rites  ;  and  all 
for  all ;  and  the  children  are,  by  birth,  inalienably, 
incontestably,  and  for  ever  involved  in  the  whole 
concern,  —  endowed  with  its  honors,  holden  to  its 
responsibilities,  inheritors  of  its  past,  testators  of  its 
future. 

Why  should  the  children  partake  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  ?  Why  anybody  ?  "  To  profess  religion  ?  " 
A  foolish  reason.  But  suppose  it  a  good  one,  the 
children  ought  to  profess  religion  as  well  as  others. 


CHILDREN    TO    BE     COMMUiNICANTS.  163 

"  That  people  may  be  in  covenant  one  with  another, 
to  watch  over  one  another,  and  offer  a  more  united 
front  to  the  powers  of  evil  ?  "  The  very  place  of  all 
others  for  the  children  to  be.  Whi/  partake  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  do  you  ask  ?  Why  do  anything  in 
a  church  way  ?  The  Lord's  Supper  is  not  the  only 
church  ifistrumentality.  The  Sabbath  and  the  Bible 
are  of  the  same  stamp.  And  the  question  is  an- 
swered when  we  reply  to  the  general  question.  What 
is  the  use  of  the  Sabbath,  or  the  Bible,  or  public 
worship,  or  any  service  of  the  Church  ?  The  reply, 
of  course,  is,  to  make  people  good,  to  train  them 
up  Christians,  to  regenerate  the  soul.  The  Lord's 
Supper  is  but  one  branch  of  this  great  spiritual 
ministration. 

"  Children  cannot  understand  the  Lord's  Supper." 
I  venture  to  assert,  if  we  bring  up  our  children  prop- 
erly, there  is  no  religious  duty,  no  custom,  no  truth, 
children  can  so  easily  understand  as  this.  I  mean 
this  :  I  think  they  can  understand  it  better  than  they 
can  understand  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  or 
prayer,  or  coming  to  the  house  of  God ;  as  well  as 
they  can  understand  benevolence,  or  forbearance,  or 
love.  If  at  this  moment  they  do  not  understand  it, 
it  is  because  we  have  wholly  failed  to  bring  them  up 
to  it.  Our  children  would  be  as  orderly  and  rever- 
ential in  this  service  as  in  prayer,  or  preaching,  or 
singing,  if  we  parents  had  only  trained  ourselves  and 
them  to  it. 

The  doctrine  of  total  depravity  and  original  sin 
shoved  the  Church  from  its  true  basis,  and  broke  the 
natural  connection  between  believing   parents  and 


164  CHILDREN    TO     BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

their  children.  Unitarianism  denies  that  dogma, 
and  restores  the  Church  to  its  true  basis.  It  unites 
parents  and  children  in  the  Church.  It  makes  the 
Church  consist  of  parents  with  their  children.  It 
gives  back  to  the  Church  and  the  fold,  and  the  arms 
of  Jesus,  the  children  that  have  been  so  long  sun- 
dered from  him.  Such  are  we  before  God  to- 
day ;  such  are  we,  elders,  youths,  children ;  such  are 
we,  or  we  are  nothing,  a  mere  collection  of  heathen 
and  publicans. 

Baptism  does  not  admit  or  initiate  into  the  Church. 
This  was  the  fatal  postulate  of  the  theory  of  deprav- 
ity, and  is  a  mere  device  to  save  the  Church  from  the 
pit  she  had  digged  for  herself.  It  is  here  where  Ro- 
manism and  Episcopacy  and  the  Baptists  all  agree. 
They  all  alike  say  to  the  generations  of  children  as 
they  are  born  into  the  Christian  community.  You 
cannot  enter  the  Church  except  you  be  baptized. 
Indeed,  Trinitarianism  almost  universally  takes  this 
ground.  Romanism  unequivocally  teaches,  in  its 
Catechism  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  "  Unless  infants 
are  baptized,  be  their  parents  Christians  or  infidels, 
they  are  born  to  eternal  misery  and  everlasting  perdi- 
tion." *  In  other  words,  without  baptism,  the  children 
even  of  the  Church,  of  pious  parents,  cannot  be  admit- 
ted into  the  Church,  into  the  estate  and  fellowship  of 
their  parents,  into  the  communion  of  saints,  or  into 
the  body  of  which  Christ  is  the  head.  Episcopacy 
teaches  the  same  thing.  It  teaches  that  baptism  is 
necessary  to  salvation.     I  have  before  me  a  sermon 

*  Miller's  "  Design  of  the  Church,"  p.  120. 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  165 

by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Spencer,  an  Episcopal  clergyman  of 
New  York,  urging  this  very  point.  He  says,  all 
mankind  are  born  to  condemnation  ;  that,  in  their 
natural  state,  children  "  are  left  to  the  uncovenanted 
mercies  of  God."  To  the  unbaptized  he  addresses 
these  words :  "  You  have  no  claim  to  the  mercy  of 
God  ;  you  have  never  been  made  Christians  ;  you 
can  never  be  entitled  to  this  name,  or  to  the  privileges 
of  Christ's  Church.  Baptism  is  necessary  to  the  sal- 
vation of  every  one  that  can  obtain  it ;  it  is  the 
only  way  in  which  we  can  become  Christians,  the 
only  way  in  which  we  can  enter  the  Church  of  God." 
This  is  the  way  Episcopacy  addresses  the  children 
of  its  own  Church  ;  in  this  way  it  shows  its  utter 
ignorance  of  what  Rev.  Nehemiah  Adams,  of  Bos- 
ton, calls  "  a  fundamental  principle  of  God's  moral 
government  of  the  universe." 

What  then  to  us  is  Baptism?  I  reply,  in  the 
language  of  the  Cambridge  Platform,  "Baptism 
presupposeth  a  Church  estate,  as  circumcision  in  the 
Old  Testament,  which  gave  no  being  to  the  Church, 
the  Church  being  before  it^  and  in  the  wilderness 
without  it.  Seals  presuppose  a  covenant  already 
in  being."  Children  get  into  the  Church  just  as 
they  get  into  the  Family,  or  the  State,  or  the  Sab- 
bath, or  into  the  whole  course  and  current  of  institu- 
tions and  influences  that  surround  them,  simply  by 
being  born  there.  And  thus  being  in  the  Church, 
along  with  their  parents,  being  in  the  divine  covenant 
of  God,  baptism  is  the  recognition  of  their  birthright, 
the  seal  of  the  covenant  of  membership ;  it  is  an 
emblem  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  fire,  the  purifying 


166  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUxNICANTS. 

holy  spirit  in  which  Christ  baptizes  his  people.  It 
is  an  outward  act  whereby  parents  in  the  Church,  on 
their  part,  in  the  presence  of  the  great  cloud  of  wit- 
nesses, solemnly  dedicate  their  children  to  God  and 
Christ  and  the  Church,  to  the  Christian  life  and  the 
Christian  destiny,  and  publicly  confess  the  duty  of 
Christian  nurture  and  admonition. 

The  children  being  in  the  Church,  indigenous  to 
it,  to  the  manner  born,  having  the  Church  seal  thus 
impressed  upon  them,  what  then  ?  All  that  the 
Church  is  accrues  to  the  children.  They  are  for- 
evermore  integrant  parts  of  it,  they  are  heirs  of  God 
and  fellow-citizens  of  the  household  of  faith.  All 
that  has  been  regarded  in  church  things  as  most  in- 
ternal and  secret,  most  solemn  and  profound,  most 
holy  and  blessed,  is  made  over  to  them.  But  more 
than  this.  We  have  now  got  the  whole  congre- 
gation, the  constituent  members  of  the  parish,  the 
varied  mass  that  come  up  hither  on  the  Lord's  day, 
in  a  position  where,  as  a  Christian  pastor,  we  can 
properly  deal  with  them.  We  see  at  once  how  to 
preach  to  them,  how  to  teach  them,  how  the  whole 
series  of  our  service,  our  praying,  our  singing,  our 
baptism,  our  communion,  adapts  itself  to  them. 

Suppose  we  consider  the  Church  as  a  school,  and 
Christ  the  great  teacher,  and  the  people  as  disci- 
ples, learners,  scholars.  The  little  children  are  all 
scholars  too,  fellow-pupils  with  their  parents,  all 
sitters  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  fellow-listeners  to  divine 
instructions,  fellow-disciples  of  divine  truth.  We 
shall  have  to  teach  the  very  small  children,  the 
youngest  church-members,  the  a  b  c   oi  Christian- 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  167 

ity.  Beautiful,  delightful  employment  I  And  here 
at  once  we  see  the  significancy  and  the  force  of  the 
Sunday  school.  From  Sunday  to  Sunday,  accord- 
ing to  what  was  enjoined  under  the  old  covenant, 
we  will  gather  the  people,  the  whole  Church,  here 
together,  men  and  women  and  children,  and  the 
stranger  that  is  within  our  gate,  that  we  may  hear 
and  learn  and  fear  the  Lord  our  God,  and  observe 
to  do  all  the  words  of  his  law,  and  that  our  children, 
ivhich  have  not  known  any  thing,  may  hear  and  learn 
to  fear  the  Lord  our  God  as  long  as  we  live  in  the 
land.  If  we  liken  the  Church  to  a  commonwealth, 
and  it  is  so  likened  in  Scripture,  we  see  how  we  all, 
parents  and  children,  stand  related  to  it.  The  chil- 
dren are  born  into  it,  they  are  fellow-citizens  wrth 
their  parents  in  a  divine  community,  a  common  law 
governs  all,  a  common  protection  is  over  all.  Our 
children  become  an  heritage  of  the  Lord,  and  the 
fruit  of  the  womb  is  his  reward.  This  Christ  Church 
is  a  little  commonwealth,  and  other  local  churches 
become  little  commonwealths,  and  these  shall  spread 
into  one  greater  commonwealth  ;  where  evermore 
shall  reign  Liberty,  Holiness,  Love,  where  suffrage 
shall  be  free,  independency  observed,  and  office  ac- 
cessible to  all.  As  the  fathers  are  gathered  to  the 
dust,  the  children  shall  rise  to  their  places.  Where 
duty  leads  or  dangers  threaten,  we  shall  offer  the 
energy  of  a  united  people  to  whatever  we  may  be 
called,  and  we  shall  be  blessed  in  the  land  which  the 
Lord  our  God  giveth  us. 

"  One   is  not  necessarily  saved  by  being  in  the 
Church."     No,  indeed.     But  we  are  in  the  Church 


168  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

that  we  may  be  saved.  This  is  a  cardinal  point,  a 
most  interesting  feature  of  the  case.  The  children 
are  in  the  Church,  of  it,  church-members,  and  this, 
so  to  say,  is  but  the  beginning  of  their  salvation  ; 
they  are  now  to  grow  up  Christians,  to  be  trained 
in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.  They 
are  born,  as  we  say,  on  Church  soil,  —  little  sprouts 
just  springing  out  of  the  ground.  They  must  be 
cultivated,  watered,  dressed,  weeded,  fertilized.  The 
great  work  of  life  is  just  begun  at  childhood  ;  we  are 
to  advance  to  the  stature  of  perfect  men  in  Christ 
Jesus.  Regeneration,  or  the  birth  of  the  spirit,  the 
unfolding  of  our  religious  natures,  the  acquisition  of 
highest  truth,  the  feeding  on  celestial  food, —  all  this 
is  to  go  on  in  the  Church,  and  not  out  of  it. 

The  common  idea  is,  after  persons  are  regener- 
ated, sanctified,  saved,  then  they  may  enter  the 
Church  ;  and  this  is  predicable  only  of  adult  persons. 
Our  idea  is  that  the  Church  incloses,  comprehends, 
all  ages,  just  as  the  State  does ;  that  it  not  only  takes 
the  lambs  in  its  arms,  but  gently  leads  those  that  are 
with  young ;  that  infancy  is  nourished,  as  it  were,  at 
the  bosom  of  the  Church  ;  that  childhood  is  led  by 
its  maternal  hand  ;  that  all  our  years,  from  the  cra- 
dle to  the  grave,  imbibe  its  spirit  and  reflect  its 
holiness ;  and  especially  and  imperatively,  that  the 
very  susceptible  and  critical  period  of  youth  is 
subject  to  its  holiest  influences,  accepts  its  highest 
sanctions,  feels  its  restraints,  and  is  inspired  by  its 
wisdom. 

Now,  viewing  my  flock  as  one,  parents  and  chil- 
dren, in  the  same  covenant  of  a  common  faith,  unit- 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  169 

ed  in  the  same  responsibility  and  hope,  what,  I  ask 
again,  about  the  children  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  — 
that  tender  point?  and  what  about  it,  granting  this 
ordinance  is  really  more  sacred  than  anything  else  ? 
During  the  last  month  we  have  had  common  Sab- 
baths, and  now  comes  what  some  are  pleased  to  con- 
sider more  holy,  a  Communion  Sabbath.  During 
this  past  time,  I  as  a  Shepherd  have  been  leading 
you,  my  flock,  sheep  and  lambs,  over  common  ground. 
In  the  great  pasture,  on  the  second  Sabbath  I  took 
you  here;  on  the  third,  there;  to  such  spots  as  I 
could.  As  I  piped,  the  lambs  came  running  along 
behind  their  parents ;  and  I  gave  you  all  as  good 
food  as  I  could.  But  Communion  Sabbath  comes, 
a  more  hoiy  time,  if  you  will  have  it  so  ;  in  other 
words,  to-day  I  your  shepherd  espy  in  the  distance 
a  more  attractive  spot,  of  more  grateful  shade,  more 
delectable  herbage,  clearer  streams,  more  sunny,  more 
Arcadian.  I  sound  my  pipe,  and  start  for  that  direc- 
tion. The  sheep  follow  me,  but  the  lambs  must  not 
go  !  Or  thus  :  to-day  is  our  festival  day,  when  we 
peculiarly  commemorate  Christ,  when  in  silence  and 
meditation  we  get  near  to  one  another  and  the  Lord, 
when  we  enter  the  holy  of  holies,  where  God  mani- 
fests himself  peculiarly  to  his  people,  when  w^e  stand 
where  the  horizon  of  spiritual  intelligence  stretches 
around  us,  and  we  come  into  the  infinite  circle  of  the 
good  and  the  pure.  These  parents  may  keep  holy 
time  w4th  us,  but  the  children  must  not!  Or  thus: 
we  go  to-day  to  the  scene  of  the  Last  Supper,  we 
pass  over  the  brook  Kidron,  to  the  garden  and  be- 
neath the  shade  of  the  olive-trees ;  we  witness  that 

15 


170  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

perilous  struggle  of  all  that  was  human  in  our  Sav- 
iour with  all  that  was  divine  in  duty;  we  go  to 
Calvary  and  look  on  while  this  great  Martyr  of  the 
ages  breathes  out  his  soul ;  we  linger  pensive  and  si- 
lent about  the  sepulchre ;  we  share  with  Mary  and 
Peter  the  transports  of  the  resurrection ;  we  gaze  as 
that  image  of  heavenly  beauty  rises  into  the  heav- 
ens ;  —  and  may  not  the  children  go  with  us? 

The  comprehension  of  children  in  this  rite  is  not 
wholly  a  strange  thing.  The  Passover  was  the  great 
covenant  feast  of  the  Mosaic  religion,  and  Jewish 
parents  were  wont  to  distribute  the  bread  and  the 
wine  to  their  children,  with  thanksgiving  to  Almighty 
God.  So  the  Lord's  Supper  is  the  covenant  feast 
of  the  Christian  religion,  and  the  early  Christians 
were  wont  in  their  own  houses  to  give  the  bread  and 
wine  to  their  children.  This  is  a  well-known  histor- 
ical fact.  And  when  we  read,  still  earlier,  of  the 
disciples  breaking  bread  from  house  to  house,  it  ad- 
mits of  no  manner  of  doubt  to  my  mind,  that  their 
children  partook  with  them.  For  some  centuries  it 
was  customary  in  many  churches  to  comprise  chil- 
dren in  this  ordinance.  Heathen  parents  used  to 
take  their  infants  in  their  arms  when  they  went  to 
sacrifice  at  the  altar,  and  this  seems  to  have  been 
urged  as  a  motive  for  Christian  parents  to  do  the 
same  by  theirs.*  The  Greek  Church  to  this  day 
universally  communicates  children.  Tasso,  the  Ital- 
ian poet,  relates  that  he  was  scarcely  nine  years  old 
when  he  first  partook  of  the  Lord's  Supper.     "With- 

*  Bingham's  Ant. 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  171 

out  fully  understanding  the  mystery,  he  yet  partici- 
pated with  the  deepest  devotion  and  joy.  "  Long 
years  afterwards,"  he  says,  "  he  could  not  forget  the 
sensations  with  which  he  received  the  symbols  of  his 
Saviour  into  that  earthly  body  of  his,  a  dwelling- 
place  yet  uncontaminated,  simple,  and  pure."  *  Need 
I  repeat  that  the  Jews  and  Gentile  nations  univer- 
sally, so  far  as  I  know,  join  their  children  with  them 
in  their  most  sacred  rites.  We  see,  then,  how  the  so- 
called  Church  almost  everywhere  has  departed  from 
the  primitive  and  apostolic  antecedents,  and  how 
especially  it  has  forgotten  that  fundamental  law  im- 
pressed by  God  on  human  nature,  and  written  in  all 
human  history,  whereby  in  religious  matters  the 
family  is  a  unit,  and  children  are  in  covenant  with 
their  parents. 

I  will  ask  you,  mother,  however  you  may  reason 
on  this  subject,  however  conventional  prejudices 
may  arise  in  your  heart  at  the  thought  of  what  we 
say,  as  you  to-day  think  of  your  boy  far  off  on 
the  restless,  treacherous  ocean,  or  away  in  some 
other  place,  amid  strangers  and  perplexities  and 
profaneness,  seeking  respite  from  toil,  yet  finding 
more  onerous  struggle  with  temptations  that  environ 
him,  in  some  city,  perhaps,  where  even  the  multitude 
creates  an  uneasy  sense  of  solitude,  and  the  rest  of 
the  Sabbath  often  gives  rein  to  every  baser  passion, 
—  I  will  ask  you,  fond  mother,  if  you  would  not  take 
greater  satisfaction  to-day,  immeasurably  greater,  if 
you  could  think  that  you  had  not  only  prayed  for 

*  Life,  Vol.  I.  p.  61. 


172  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

your  child,  and  brought  him  to  the  house  of  God, 
and  had  him  instructed  in  the  Sabbath  School,  but 
also  from  his  earliest  years  had  likewise  taken  him 
to  the  communion-table  with  you,  had  made  him 
feel  that  he  was  coequal  and  absolute  part  and  par- 
cel of  the  Church  with  you,  had  identified  his  grow- 
ing years  with  all  the  purposes  and  all  the  rites  of 
Christianity,  and  enrolled,  I  will  not  say  his  name, 
but  his  thoughts,  his  imagination,  his  destiny,  in  that 
book  where  the  whole  fraternity  of  the  good  in  heav- 
en and  earth  are  recorded  ?  And,  my  friends,  when 
our  children  die,  and  we  so  easily,  and  so  naturally, 
so  irresistibly,  assign  them  their  place  in  the  Church 
above,  will  we  ever  again  be  negligent,  or  hesitat- 
ing, or  sceptical,  in  bringing  them  into  the  Church 
below?  Have  I,  your  minister,  been  to  blame  in 
this  matter,  God  forgive  me,  and  forbid  that  I  should 
ever  be  so  again !  As  things  now  are,  our  young 
people  have  no  sense,  no  deep,  vital  sense,  of  Chris- 
tian responsibility.  And  I  maintain,  that,  however 
we  may  try  to  give  them  a  Christian  education,  and 
awe  them  with  Christian  admonitions,  and  store 
them  with  Christian  advice,  so  long  as  we  keep  them 
out  of  the  Christian  Church  they  never  will  have 
this  sense  ;  and  for  the  reason  that  this  whole  thing 
of  Christian  responsibility  centres  within  the  Church, 
an,d  is,  so  to  say,  monopolized  by  it.  We  are  so 
trained  as  to  feel  that  this  solemn  burden  is  taken 
up,  and  its  whole  weight  borne,  by  those  who  join 
the  Church.  If  then  we  would  that  our  young  men 
and  women  possess  this  sense,  in  its  fulness  and  en- 
tireness,  a  thing  so  essential  to  their  happiness,  their 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  173 

usefulness,  their  moral  perfection  and  complete  sal- 
vation, they  must  be  in  the  Church.  In  England, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Armstrong,  a  Unitarian  clergyman,  in 
a  recent  pastoral  letter,  adverting  to  the  fact  of  the 
general  recklessness  of  youth,  says  they  must  come 
under  a  higher  sense  of  responsibility.  To  this 
end,  he  proposes  what  I  have  just  intimated,  they 
must  be  in  the  Church. 

Awhile  since  I  preached  a  discourse  to  this  effect, 
that  duty  was  irrespective  of  profession,  —  that  a 
man  was  bound  to  be  religious  whether  he  had 
made  a  profession  or  no.  This  was  addressed  to 
that  condition  of  things  in  which  we  find  all  our 
parishes,  a  few  professors  and  a  mass  of  non-profes- 
sors. As  the  term  is  used,  and  the  affair  is  managed, 
I  think  very  little  of  what  is  called  making  a  pro- 
fession of  religion.  I  have  sometimes  thought  I 
would  none  of  it.  The  question  is  not  whether  we 
will  make  a  profession  of  religion,  but  whether  we 
will  be  religious  and  Christian,  and  especially  train 
up  our  children  to  be  religious  and  Christian.  Nor 
is  it  now  the  question  how  the  multitude  of  us  will 
act  in  view  of  that  little  collection  called  the  Church, 
but  whether  we  all,  parents  and  children,  enter  that 
sphere  and  occupy  that  post  at  once  of  obligation 
and  sustentation,  of  duty  and  of  hope,  —  the  Church  ? 
Question  ?  No,  it  is  no  question.  I  have  never 
preached  to  you  but  as  one,  I  have  never  enforced 
duty  upon  you  but  as  one,  I  have  practically  ignored 
the  pale  by  which  a  few  may  be  surrounded.  What 
I  now  do  is  to  take  that  pale  and  surround  the 
whole  of  you  with  it.     And  this  brings  me  round 

15* 


174  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

to  the  point  where  I  have  ever  stood,  but  now  more 
perfectly  defined,  that  of  preaching  duty  and  obliga- 
tion to  you  as  all  alike  church-members  ;  that  is,  all 
occupying  before  God  the  highest  position  of  respon- 
sibility. If  any  do  not  like  such  preaching  and  such 
a  position,  all  I  can  say  is,  I  do  not  see  how,  since 
God  has  raised  such  a  standard  for  us  in  his  word 
and  in  our  own  consciousness,  I  can  lower  it  for  any 
man. 

Some  will  say  they  wish  their  children  to  grow 
up  free,  perfectly  free.  So  do  I,  in  any  just  sense 
of  the  word.  But  I  take  it  you  do  not  wish  them  to 
grow  up  free  to  be  atheists,  to  be  profane,  to  sin,  — 
free  from  the  highest  Christian  obligations.  If  you 
do,  you  would  of  course  not  bring  them  here.  You 
wish  them,  I  shall  presume,  to  grow  up  Christians, 
rooted  in  Christian  principles,  and  determined  to  a 
Christian  life,  to  be  such  freemen  as  the  truth  makes 
free.  You  wish  them  free  from  sin,  and  free  to  do 
right,  wherever  they  go.  To  this  end,  as  one  gracious 
means  of  good,  I  insist  this  whole  thing  of  what  we 
call  the  Church,  all  that  it  is  and  possesses  and 
promises,  its  sanctions  and  solemnities,  its  worship, 
instruction,  and  communion,  must  be  given  to  them, 
must  inclose  them,  fold  them  as  an  atmosphere, 
guard  them  as  a  divinity? 

"  Man  is  evermore  liable  to  fall,  young  men  are 
liable  to  go  astray."  I  know  this,  I  know  it,  and 
therefore  all  the  more  would  I  secure  their  uprightness 
and  shield  their  steps  by  every  possible  instrumen- 
tality. Some  may  imagine  their  children  will  not 
grow  up  Christians,  do  the  best  they  can  for  them. 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  175 

Possibly.     But  the  promise  is,  "  Train  up  a  child  in 
the  way  he  should  go,  and  when  he  is  old  he  will 
not  depart  from  it."     And  I  am  sure  that,  so  long  as 
we  keep  our  children  out  of  the  position  of  highest 
responsibility,  a  responsibility  graduated  according 
to  capacity  in  every  case,  call  it  Church  or  what  you 
•  will,  so  long  will  they  not  be  what  we  wish  them  to 
be.    Suppose  you  wish  your  child  to  learn  at  school, 
to  be  a  scholar,  and  after  a  sort  send  him  to  school, 
yet  refuse  to  let  him  take  on  himself  the  respon- 
sibility of  the  school,  or  to  put  him  in  the  position 
of  a  scholar  ;  you  say  to  the  teacher,  I  wish  my  boy 
to  come  in  here  occasionally,  I  wish  him  to  hear  what 
you  have  to  say,  but  I  do  not  wish  you  to  regard 
him  as  of  the  school,  as   a  scholar,  nor  to  lay  any 
rules  upon  him,  or  enforce  any  lessons.    Just  so  long, 
your  child  never  will  be  a  scholar.     Now  if  there  be 
in  this  building,  in  this  assembly,  in  this  parish,  in 
these  gatherings  together,  a  position  of  high  Chris- 
tian responsibility,  which  our  children  cannot  reach, 
to  which  we  refuse  to  take  them,  and  unto  which 
we  dare  not  commit  them,  however  we  may  bring 
them  here  from   Sunday  to   Sunday,  just  to  look 
about,  or   hear  what   they  please  to  hear  and  feel 
what  they   please   to   feel,  just  so  long  there  is  a 
moral  certainty  they  will  not  grow  up   Christians. 
Home  influences,  and   various   causes   cooperating 
with  the  nature  that  is  in  them,  may  make  them 
Christians.     But  bringing  them  to  meeting  in  this 
way  never  will. 

Will  it  be   said,  we  may  reach  the   position    of 
highest  moral  and  spiritual  responsibility  out  of  the 


176  CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS. 

Church  ?  I  say,  when  you  have  reached  that  point, 
you  have  reached  the  true  Church  point,  you  are 
the  Church.  Let  us  suppose  that  in  the  Old  South 
Church,  Boston,  the  large  mass  now  out  of  the 
Church  should  begin  to  assume  the  position  of 
highest  Christian  responsibility,  should  endeavor 
among  themselves  to  grow  up  Christians,  and  do 
Christian  deeds,  and  keep  holy  time,  and  pray,  and 
have  the  Lord's  Supper  and  baptism  among  them- 
selves ;  why,  they  instantly  become  a  church.  That 
is  the  fact  about  it.  What  I  teach  is,  that  inas- 
much as  the  word  Church  is  only  a  convenient  term 
for  expressing  the  organization  of  the  religious  or 
Christian  element,  or  since  religious  society  merely 
defines  the  word  Church,  the  highest  responsibilities 
commence  at  the  moment  of  initiating  such  an  or- 
ganization, and  one  who  enters  a  truly  religious 
society,  duly  constituted,  enters  the  Church.  Or,  in 
other  words,  that  Church,  instead  of  being  confined 
to  a  few,  covers  all  that  religious  society  covers,  all 
that  flock  covers,  or  all  that  worshipping  congre- 
gation covers,  and  especially  that  it  includes  the 
children. 

In  bringing  what  I  have  to  say  to  a  close,  let  me 
go  back  to  the  children,  and  ask  what,  to  take  it  for 
all  in  all,  is  the  most  critical  period  of  human  life  ? 
I  answer,  it  is  the  period  of  the  development  of  the 
passions,  between  the  age  of  twelve  and  eighteen. 
This  I  take  to  be,  on  the  whole,  the  most  susceptible 
period  for  good  or  evil  we  pass  through.  Now  I 
wish  to  ask.  Where  shall  our  youths  be  at  this  pe- 
riod, in  the  Church  or  out  of  it  ?    I  ask  parents,  I  ask 


CHILDREN    TO    BE    COMMUNICANTS.  177 

ministers  of  parishes  everywhere,  I  ask  the  philan- 
thropist and  the  legislator,  I  ask  people  of  all  doctrines 
and  all  forms,  Where  shall  om*  youths  be  at  this  peri- 
od, in  the  Church  or  out  of  it  ?  They  must  be  in  one 
position  or  the  other.  As  things  are,  there  is  no  mid- 
dle ground.  I  fancy  I  hear  but  one  answer.  They 
ought  to  be  in  the  Church.  What  is  most  sacred 
should  impress  them,  what  is  most  benign  should 
embrace  them,  what  is  most  edifying  should  mould 
them,  what  tends  in  the  highest  degree  to  adorn 
their  natures,  correct  their  selfishness,  and  sanctify 
their  being,  should  be  theirs.  Well,  then,  to  be  in 
the  Church  during  that  time,  they  must  be  there 
before  they  are  twelve  years  old.  And  now  I  ask 
you  if  you  dare  to  trust  so  amazing  a  result  to  the 
hazards  of  special  conversion,  or  the  contingencies 
of  a  revival.  For  one,  I  dare  not.  There  is  no  al- 
ternative, then,  recognizing,  as  we  do,  the  great  fact 
of  birth-connection  with  the  Church,  but  for  us  to 
train  our  children  up  at  once  in  the  Church  for  the 
Church,  in  the  Church  for  the  world,  in  the  Church 
below  for  the  Church  above. 


SEEMON    X. 


EDUCATION,   CONSIDERED  AS   THE   GREAT    CHRIS- 
TIAN LAW. 

BEING    UP    YOUK    CHILDEEN    IN    THE    NURTURE   AND   ADMONITION 

OF  THE  LORD.  —  Ephesians  vi.  4. 

EKTpe(f)€T€  avra  ev  iraihela  kcu  vovOeala  Kvplov. 
"  Nourish  them  ia  the  discipline  and  instruction 
of  the  Lord " ;  the  schooling  and  remembrance 
of  Jesus ;  the  knowledge,  science,  instruction,  and 
memory  of  Jesus.  Bring  up  your  children  in  the 
thorough  education  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Give  them 
a  Christian  education,  educate  them  into  Christ. 

Let  us  place  at  one  end  of  the  scale  Peter,  the 
wild  boy.  He  was  found  in  a  piece  of  woods  in 
Germany.  When  first  discovered,  he  was  walking  on 
his  hands  and  feet,  climbing  up  trees  like  a  squirrel, 
and  feeding  on  grass  and  moss.  When  brought  to 
the  presence  of  George  the  First,  who  was  at  dinner, 
he  was  offered  food  from  the  table,  but  would  eat 
nothing.  Raw  meat  he  devoured  with  a  relish. 
He  was  unable  to  speak,  and  no  one  could  tell  or 
learn  how  he  came  to  be  abandoned.  Escaping 
from  those  who  had  charge  of  him,  he  fled  again  to 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        179 

the  woods,  and  such  was  his  agility  and  strength  it 
was  impossible  to  retake  him,  except  by  sawing 
down  the  tree  into  which  he  ran.  In  about  a  year 
he  was  taught  to  abandon  the  use  of  his  hands  in 
walking,  and  to  move  about  in  an  erect  posture.  No 
inducements  could  persuade  him  to  lie  in  a  bed, 
and  he  would  only  sleep  in  a  corner  of  the  room. 
He  was  placed  under  the  tuition  of  a  celebrated 
physician  of  that  day.  Dr.  Arbuthnot,  in  the  hope 
that  after  a  time  he  would  be  enabled  to  express  him- 
self in  words.  But  all  efforts  to  this  end  were  un- 
availing; he  could  never  be  taught  to  speak.  He 
expressed  pleasure  by  neighing  like  a  horse,  and 
imitating  other  animal  sounds.  Unable  to  be  dis- 
ciplined to  the  usages  of  civilized  society,  he  was 
placed  in  charge  of  a  farmer,  who  put  him  to  school, 
but  without  visible  improvement.  He  frequently  ran 
away,  and  seemed  to  delight  to  subsist  on  herbage, 
leaves,  and  tender  roots,  and  to  climb  into  trees. 
He  lived  to  the  age  of  seventy-three.  His  face  was 
not  ugly  or  disagreeable,  and  he  had  a  look  that 
might  have  been  called  sensible  and  sagacious  for 
a  savage.  He  was  never  mischievous,  but  had  a 
gentleness  of  manner.  He  was  extremely  good- 
tempered,  except  in  cold  and  gloomy  weather.  His 
passions  seem  not  to  have  been  developed.  In  his 
first  years,  as  we  may  suppose,  he  never  had  occa- 
sion to  get  angry  with  any  one.  In  after  life  he  was 
not  easily  provoked,  he  did  no  violence,  except  at 
first  to  tear  the  bed-clothes  that  were  irksome  to 
him. 

At   the    other   end    of    the    scale   we   will    place 


180         EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

Sir  Isaac  Newton ;  the  discoverer  of  the  nature  of 
fluxions,  of  the  composition  of  light,  and  of  the  law 
of  gravitation  ;  the  distinguished  professor  and  able 
Master  of  the  Mint ;  the  man  who,  "  with  a  compre- 
hension which  embraced  at  one  view  the  meaning  of 
every  subject  to  which  he  directed  his  attention,  and 
overleaped  as  trifling  all  the  difficulties  that  had 
arrested  the  progress  of  other  philosophers,  was  thus 
able  to  shed  a  lustre  on  the  age  in  which  he  lived, 
and  the  country  which  gave  him  birth,  and  to  in- 
troduce such  astonishing  improvements,  and  make 
such  stupendous  discoveries  in  science,  as  would 
each  of  them  individually  have  bestowed  immor- 
tality." 

What  was  the  cause  of  the  difference  between  these 
two  men  ?  I  answer,  education.  And  solely  that. 
If  we  examine  the  case  in  all  its  parts,  and  explore 
the  secret  springs,  we  shall  conclude  that  the  essen- 
tial and  fundamental  cause  of  difference  was  simply 
education.  Of  course  I  do  not  employ  the  term  ed- 
ucation in  precisely  the  way  we  are  wont  to  use  it, 
as  implying  certain  specific  forms  and  modes  of 
instruction.  We  speak  of  college  education,  and 
common-school  education,  and  the  cause  of  educa- 
tion, but  we  always  use  the  word  relatively,  not  as 
distinguished  from  absolutely  no  education,  but  from 
a  low  or  poorer  sort  of  education.  Everybody  in 
civil  society  is  to  a  certain  extent  educated.  There 
is  a  civilized  and  an  uncivilized  education.  The 
New-Zealander  educates  his  child  not  less  than  the 
Englishman.  Perhaps  a  better  word  than  education  is 
culture.     Herein  are  also  suggested  social  influences. 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.         181 

I  mean  by  it  all  those  agencies  and  means  where- 
by the  faculties  are  developed,  the  mind  informed,  and 
the  character  moulded.  I  say,  then,  the  whole  differ- 
ence between  the  wild  boy  and  Sir  Isaac  Newton 
was  education.  Of  course  the  latter  may  have  pos- 
sessed stronger  natural  mental  powers,  he  may  have 
had  an  innate  mathematical  tendency.  On  the  other 
hand,  Peter  may  have  been  endowed  with  more  vivid 
imaginative  powers,  and  deeper  affections. 

If  seen  side  by  side,  infants  of  a  week  old,  you 
would  have  discerned  no  difference  between  them. 
Their  complexion,  their  shape,  their  crying,  are  all 
alike,  their  wants  are  alike ;  the  same  helplessness, 
the  same  need  of  tender  care,  marks  the  condition 
of  them  both.  At  a  month's  age,  they  would  both 
smile  to  you  in  the  same  way,  fling  out  their  tiny 
arms  in  similar  life,  and  go  quietly  to  sleep  by  simi- 
lar rocking.  But  Peter  is  left  in  the  forest,  and 
abandoned  to  the  maternal  instinct  of  a  brute  beast. 
Isaac  is  trained  up  in  his  father's  house.  "  His 
mother  bestows  a  particular  care  on  his  education." 
At  twelve  he  goes  to  a  grammar  school,  at  eighteen 
to  college.  When  under  the  instruction  of  the  fa- 
mous Isaac  Barrow,  he  begins  to  apply  himself  to 
mathematics.  In  infancy,  withal,  he  is  baptized  or 
solemnly  consecrated  to  the  religion  of  his  country 
and  his  God,  and  at  an  early  age  he  became  a  com- 
municant in  the  Church  of  England.  We  see  in 
the  one  case  education,  or  culture,  beginning  its 
work ;  in  the  other,  an  entire  neglect  of  everything 
of  the  sort. 

Here,  then,  are  two  impressible  human  natures,  the 

16 


182         EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

one  the  fortunate  subject  of  impressing  agencies,  the 
other  a  derelict,  and  absolutely  without  them.  Both 
have  religious,  moral,  and  intellectual  faculties.  In 
Isaac  these  are  exercised,  in  Peter  left  dormant. 
Isaac's  spirit  is  born,  he  undergoes  regeneration. 
Peter's  remains  as  it  was  in  his  mother's  womb. 

Let  us  notice  the  progress  of  events  a  little  more 
in  detail.  Peter,  we  are  told,  never  learned  to  speak. 
Isaac  soon  spoke  his  mother  tongue.  Peter  was 
taught  no  language,  Greek  or  Hebrew,  English  or 
Indian.  This  faculty  of  speech,  language,  the  use 
of  language,  is  purely  a  thing  of  education.  Peter 
could  only  utter  sounds  like  those  of  a  wild  animal, 
as  Mademoiselle  Leblanc  imitated  the  various  cries 
of  birds.  Peter  had  a  tongue,  and  throat,  and  the 
natural  functions  of  speech,  only  there  wasno  moth- 
er to  teach  his  infant  lips  to  try  their  powers. 

We  are  all  educated  into  language.  This  gift  of 
speech  is  one  of  the  most  wonderful  with  which  the 
Creator  has  endowed  us.  Yet  it  must  be  educated, 
drawn  out.  If  left  to  itself,  absolutely,  it  would  nevet 
act.  Children  brought  up  on  a  solitary  island  by  a 
dumb  nurse,  and  other  similar  instances  which  are 
recorded,  are  proof  of  this.  There  are  some  who 
speak  Chinese,  there  are  others  who  speak  Italian  ; 
with  certain  people  the  entire  language  is  Ger- 
man, in  other  parts  of  the  earth  French  prevails. 
How  is  this  ?  People  are  so  educated.  There  is 
no  other  explanation.  The  reason  why  you  and  I 
speak  English,  while  we  cannot  understand  a  sylla- 
ble of  Arabic,  is,  that  we  have  been  educated  into  the 
English  language,  and  not  into  the  Arabic. 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        183 

Now  philosophers  say,  we  think  in  words.  I  be- 
lieve this  is  so.  If  you  watch  your  own  thoughts,  I 
believe  you  will  find  them  clothed  in  words.  We 
Americans  think  in  English  words.  A  Chinese 
thinks  in  Chinese  words.  The  greater  our  vocabu- 
lary, the  greater  is  our  copiousness  of  thought.  A 
child  never  begins  to  think  very  intelligibly  until  it 
begins  to  talk.  You  cannot  very  well  think,  "  Our 
Father  which  art  in  heaven,"  until  you  can  say  the 
words,  "  Our  Father  which  art  in  heaven."  Well, 
Peter  had  no  w^ords,  and  how  could  he  exercise 
thought  ?  He  never  heard  the  words,  father,  mother, 
God,  Christ,  truth,  beauty,  love,  and  how  could  he 
think  those  thoughts  ?  And  if  he  could  not  think 
those  thoughts,  how  could  his  mind  or  character  ma- 
ture ?  Sir  Isaac's  mother  taught  him  all  those  words, 
led  his  infantile  organs  along  until  they  could  dis- 
tinctly utter  them,  and  she  explained  the  ideas  that 
belonged  to  those  words,  and  so  educated  her  child 
into  the  words  and  into  the  thoughts  of  father, 
mother,  God,  Christ,  truth,  love,  and  beauty. 

This  fact  of  having  the  English  language,  and  of 
having  the  ideas  with  which  the  English  language  is 
full,  is  purely  the  result  of  education.  And  it  is  a 
process,  for  the  most  part,  that  begins  in  infancy. 
Sir  Isaac  went  on  being  educated  more  and  more. 
He  exercised  his  faculties,  he  acquired  knowledge,  a 
new  intellectual  consciousness  was  awakened  within 
him  ;  his  soul  was  being  born  day  by  day.  Peter 
had  nobody  to  lead  him  along ;  as  I  said,  he  could 
only  follow  the  beasts  with  whom  he  herded.  He 
climbed  trees,  as  they  did,  and  walked  on  all  fours, 
and  dug  roots,  and  slept  on  the  grass. 


184       EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

Did  not  God  love  this  poor  wild  boy  ?  He  did. 
But  God  has  so  constituted  things,  has  made  human 
beings  so  dependent  one  on  another,  has  so  bound  the 
child  to  its  mother,  that  if,  in  our  tender  years,  we  be 
cast  off,  there  is  no  hope  for  us.  Was  Peter's  nature 
depraved  ?  Not  in  the  least.  He  was  simply  neg- 
lected. He  had  powers  in  him  that  might  have  been 
cultivated  into  what  we  call  intelligence  and  reason, 
into  religion  and  worship,  into  habits  of  economy  or 
efforts  of  art,  but  these  powers  were  left  dormant. 

An  infant  is  not  developed,  but  its  nature  is  such 
that,  if  left  like  a  plant  in  the  shade,  its  true  charac- 
ter will  never  appear.  This  is  a  law  of  things,  an 
eternal  law,  an  inexorable  law  that  circumscribes  us. 
Here  is  a  kernel  of  corn  ;  it  is  sound  and  good ;  but 
if  I  never  plant  it,  it  will  never  grow.  If  I  throw  it 
into  a  cold,  dark,  damp  place,  it  will  moulder  and 
decay.  If  I  plant  it  in  a  sterile  soil,  it  will  grow  but 
poorly.  If  I  plant  it  in  good  ground,  and  do  not 
cultivate  it,  its  produce  there  will  be  small. 

Peter  was  a  kernel  of  corn,  as  it  were,  cast  aside 
to  moulder  and  die.  Sir  Isaac  Newton  was  a  simi- 
lar grain,  planted  in  good  ground,  and  thoroughly 
cultivated. 

No,  Peter  was  not  depraved.  Even  the  beasts 
that  were  his  companions  had  not  taught  him  malev- 
olence or  trained  him  to  cruelty.  He  was  quite  mild 
and  inoffensive.  Peter  had  the  organs  of  speech, 
but  because  they  were  not  cultivated  in  infancy,  he 
could  never  learn  to  speak.  This  is  a  peculiar  law 
of  the  human  system.  The  organs  seem  to  become 
indurated,  if  not  used ;  their  elasticity  is  lost,  and 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        185 

even  their  sensibility  perishes.  He  had  the  power 
of  reading;  bat  from  the  same  cause,  though  he 
was  sent  to  school,  he  could  never  learn  to  read. 
He  had  the  organ  of  reverence,  which,  cultivated, 
would  have  made  him  a  religious  man,  but,  unculti- 
vated, left  him  as  a  dumb  beast.  He  had  the  ca- 
pacity for  filial  love,  but,  from  the  same  cause,  he 
seemed  to  have  no  idea  of  father  or  mother,  and  not 
one  sentiment  proper  to  childhood. 

Newton  walked  in  paths  of  philosophy,  while  Pe- 
ter burrowed  in  thickets  in  summer  and  in  the  chim- 
ney-corner in  winter.  Newton's  mind  comprehended 
"  satellites,  planets,  and  suns  hanging  on  their  centres 
in  the  arched  void  of  heaven,  and  systems  connected 
to  each  other  by  the  revolution  of  comets,  all  floating 
in  the  boundless  inane  "  ;  while  Peter's  mind  was  as 
a  stagnant  pool  cooped  in  the  recesses  of  his  heavy 
frame.  Newton  bowed  in  awful  reverence  to  the 
God  of  the  universe  ;  Peter  knew  no  superior  but  the 
rude  farmer  in  whose  custody  he  was  placed.  New- 
ton passed  away  shedding  a  blaze  of  light  upon  the 
globe  he  inhabited ;  Peter  died  an  object  of  curios- 
ity, as  a  monster  of  nature.  All  this  difference,  I  re- 
peat, was  owing  to  education  or  culture.  This  is 
what  education  does. 

By  education,  I  of  course  refer  not  merely  to  what 
the  school-teacher  may  impart  by  the  drill  of  lessons, 
but  to  that  almost  endless  combination  of  influences 
which  touch  and  affect  the  human  mind  in  the  civil- 
ized state.  It  includes  not  merely  what  was  done 
for  Newton,  but  what  he  did  for  himself;  not  only 
opportunities,  but  the  diligent  use  of  them.  The 
16-* 


186        EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

powers  are  acted  upon,  indeed,  but  they  are  also  self- 
acting.  But  this  is  to  be  observed,  —  unless  we  are 
the  passive  subjects  of  exterior  culture  in  our  first 
^ears,  we  are  not  able  to  become  self-culturists  in 
after-time,  looking,  I  mean,  at  humanity  in  the  ex- 
treme instance  of  this  forest  child. 

At  opposite  ends  of  the  scale,  then,  we  see  Peter 
the  wild  boy,  and  Sir  Isaac  Newton  the  philosopher, 
and  this  contrast  and  wide  separation  are  owing  to 
education.  This  might  have  made  Peter  the  philos- 
opher, and  the  want  of  it  degraded  Newton  into  the 
wild  boy.  Between  these  two  range  the  great  ma- 
jority of  human  beings,  whose  places  are  graduated 
according  to  their  culture,  or  education. 

Our  conclusion  is,  that  the  great  law  of  life,  of 
progressive,  growing  life,  of  life  considered  as  made 
up  of  wh^t  we  do  and  what  we  are,  is  education. 

Let  me  take  another  instance ;  not  of  two  indi- 
viduals, but  of  one  individual  in  two  states,  or  at  one 
end  of  the  scale  at  one  time,  and  at  the  other  at 
another.  It  shall  be  Laura  Bridgman.  You  know 
about  her,  and  I  need  not  amplify  her  history.  She 
was  a  sprightly  infant  with  blue  eyes,  but  disease,  in 
the  space  of  two  years,  made  her  blind,  deaf,  dumb, 
and  with  only  a  slight  consciousness  of  smell  or 
taste  ;  her  faculties,  her  speech,  her  reason,  her  affec- 
tions, her  industry,  her  progress,  became  thus,  as  it 
were,  sealed  up  for  ever.  Yet  she  was  not,  like  the 
wild  boy,  cast  off  from  human  society,  and  reduced 
to  the  lone  pupilage  of  beasts  and  woods.  She  had 
a  home,  and  a  mother  that  loved  her ;  and  she  had 
one  sense  left,  that  of  touch,  and  through  it  she  re- 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        187 

ceived  impressions  and  ideas,  and  by  this  her  mind 
was  in  a  slight  degree  affected.  In  other  words,  she 
.  received  a  little  education. 

But  Dr.  Howe  took  her  in  charge,  and  contrived 
ways  for  reaching  her  faculties  more  nearly  and  inti- 
mately. He  taught  her  a  rude  kind  of  language ; 
he  taught  her  to  read  and  write,  and  knit  and  sew. 
"  So  strong,"  says  Dr.  Howe,  "  seems  to  be  her  natu- 
ral tendency  to  put  on  the  garb  of  words,  that  Laura 
often  soliloquizes  in  her  finger  language.  She  has 
great  thirst  for  knowledge,  a  quick  perception  of  the 
relation  of  things.  In  her  moral  character  it  is  beau- 
tiful to  observe  her  continual  gladness,  her  keen  en- 
joyment of  existence,  her  expansive  love,  her  sympa- 
thy with  suffering,  her  conscientiousness,  thankful- 
ness, and  hopefulness.  She  keeps  a  diary,  and  she 
makes  twine  bags.  Her  countenance  has  improved, 
and  beams  with  intelligence."  From  a  condition 
bordering  upon  idiocy,  she  becomes  an  intelligent 
woman  ;  from  staring  vacancy,  her  face  grows  radi- 
ant with  expression. 

This,  too,  is  a  result  of  education.  Education 
carries  this  unfortunate  person  from  one  end  of  the 
scale  to  the  other.  By  a  fixed  law,  certain  things 
acting  upon  the  mind  quicken  and  develop  it.  By 
the  same  law,  the  mind  thus  brought  into  activity 
goes  on  to  make  greater  progress. 

In  passing,. let  us  notice  this  striking  fact.  Re- 
garding those  children  of  the  wilds,  lost  or  deserted 
human  offspring,  foundlings  of  nature,  the  foster-sons 
of  wolves  and  bears,  it  is  found  that,  unless  the  work 
of  education  begins  before  the  age  of  puberty,  it  can- 


188        EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

not  be  prosecuted  at  all ;  or  if  it  is,  the  success  is 
very  trifling.  The  faculties  become  too  deadened  to 
be  resuscitated  by  human  means.  Victor,  the  sav- 
age of  Avignon,  could  be  made  to  utter  only  a  few 
exclamations  and  unimportant  words. 

We  become  what  we  are  educated  to  be.  This  is 
the  great  law.  But  this  does  not  make  us  irrespon- 
sible. Responsibility  increases  just  in  proportion  to 
the  light  we  have.  In  proportion  as  we  become  edu- 
cated, is  a  new  consciousness  of  power,  a  new  sense 
of  obligation,  kindled  within.  Yet  in  some  things 
are  we  wholly  passive  and  unconcerned.  I  am  not 
answerable  for  the  fact  that  my  education  was  in  the 
English  language,  and  not  in  the  French ;  that  my 
religion  is  the  Christian,  and  not  the  Jewish.  These 
are  things  in  which  I  have  normally  neither  lot  nor 
part.  To  me  it  was  a  pure  fatality  whether  the  gov- 
ernment to  which  I  owed  obedience  was  a  monarchy 
or  a  republic.  A  Mohammedan  is  not  to  be  blamed 
for  being  a  Mohammedan.  "  In  every  nation,  he  that 
feareth  God  and  worketh  righteousness  is  accepted 
of  him."  The  point  of  moral  responsibility,  in  all 
situations,  ages,  dispensations,  is  just  here ;  do 
we  live  up  to  the  light  we  have  ?  But  we  become 
what  we  are  educated  to  be.  "  Train  up  a  child  in 
the  way  he  should  go,  and  when  he  is  old  he  will  not 
depart  from  it." 

I  have  already  intimated  that  education,  in  the 
sense  in  which  I  now  use  the  term,  is  not  mere 
teaching.  It  is  not  the  common  school,  not  the  Sun- 
day school,  not  the  pulpit,  nor  the  press,  alone,  which 
educates.     The  work  begins  away  back  in  the  cradle ; 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        189 

it  begins  with  the  first  look  the  mother  gives  her 
child,  the  first  kiss  she  impresses  on  its  lips,  and  the 
first  word  she  speaks  in  its  ears.  It  includes  every 
species  of  thing  that  addresses  and  excites  our  natu- 
ral sensibilities.  It  comes  down  in  those  impalpable 
shapes  of  past  life,  past  traditions,  past  customs,  that 
hang  as  an  atmosphere  over  the  community  in  which 
we  live. 

As  soon  as  Laura  Bridgman  could  walk,  "  she  be- 
gan to  explore  the  room  and  house,  and  feel  the 
form,  density,  weight,  and  heat  of  every  article  she 
could  lay  her  hands  upon  "  ;  and  these  were  the  things 
that  helped  educate  her.  She  felt  of  her  mother's 
hands  when  she  was  knitting,  and  so  learned  to  knit 
herself.  Peter  saw  the  beasts  around  him  eating  raw 
flesh  and  walking  on  all  fours,  and  that  became  his 
education.  Nature  helps  to  educate  us.  If  Laura's 
blue  eyes  could  have  been  visited  by  the  blue  heav- 
ens, her  interior  life,  her  sensations,  her  whole  moral 
being,  would  have  been  very  different.  Public  sen- 
timent, the  laws  of  the  land,  the  dignity  of  civiliza- 
tion that  surrounds  us,  contribute  to  this  educating 
process. 

We  scarcely  realize  how  we  are  being  every  day 
insensibly  educated.  A  child  is  thus  continually 
acted  upon  by  a  parent.  Here  are  persons  now  be- 
fore me  with  particular  views  and  feelings  that  they 
have  thus  imperceptibly  acquired  from  their  mothers. 
Then,  too,  we  go  on  to  educate  ourselves  in  ten  thou- 
sand ways.  The  exercise  of  a  particular  faculty 
prompts  us  to  use  it  again.  Any  given  enjoyment 
leads  us  to  seek  the  means  for  the  repetition  of  that 


190        EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

enjoyment.  As  the  spiritual  and  intellectual  facul- 
ties are  excited  into  action,  conscience  arises  In  the 
breast,  and  the  sense  of  right  and  wrong  is  felt. 
Truth  educates  us,  and  error  educates  us. 

Now  I  take  Christianity  to  be  the  grand  and 
divine  system  for  the  education  of  the  race.  There 
were  some  educational  properties  in  Judaism,  and 
all  the  ancient  religions.  But  Christianity  is  chief 
and  final.  The  Mosaic  law  was  a  schoolmaster,  to 
bring  us  to  Christ ;  a  primary  school,  conducting  to 
the  high-school.  I  understand  that  Christ's  doctrines 
and  example,  his  life  and  death,  are  addressed  to  hu- 
man nature  to  develop  and  unfold  it.  Not  only  does 
this  system  communicate  ideas,  it  arouses  reflection, 
it  invigorates  the  faculties  and  perfects  our  being. 
There  is  a  natural  susceptibility  in  the  human  heart 
to  Christian  truth,  as  there  is  to  any  other  truth. 
Some  proficiency  has  been  made  by  the  race  under 
every  species  of  religious  culture.  That  anticipated 
by  Christianity  is  the  highest.  The  light  ever  shined 
in  the  dark  place,  but  Christ  was  a  flood  of  light 
thrown  over  the  world.  The  object  of  culture  is  to 
create  growth,  to  nourish  the  latent  vitality  into  vigor 
and  fruit.  The  object  of  the  Christian  culture  is  to 
arouse  and  perfect  the  true  life  in  our  souls. 

Laura  Bridgman  had  one  birth  of  the  flesh,  which 
was  flesh.  She  had  another,  or  new  birth,  of  the 
spirit,  when  her  faculties  were  reached,  and  her  con- 
science, affections,,  and  reason  began  to  be  developed. 
So  Mademoiselle  Leblanc  experienced  a  new  birth 
when  she  began  to  speak.  Ye  must  be  born  again. 
Christianity,  in  its  educational  and  culturing  process, 
not  only  points,  but  leads,  to  regeneration. 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        191 

Look  at  Christ  how  and  when  you  will,  —  buffet- 
ing with  temptation  on  the  mountain,  teaching  the 
people  by  the  sea-shore,  plucking  wheat  on  the  Sab- 
bath, taking  children  into  his  arms,  rejoicing  in  a 
serene  peace  when  Lazarus  is  raised,  weltering  in 
agony  as  his  own  death  draws  near,  —  and  he  is  a 
something  of  immeasurable  force,  divine  and  human, 
addressed  to  my  heart  and  mind,  my  conduct  and 
steps,  to  train  me  also  into  a  divine  life.  The  whole 
is  a  system  of  discipline  and  instruction,  designed 
for  the  perfection  of  the  individual  and  of  the  race. 
Christ  was  supernatural  in  so  far  as  God  was  espe- 
cially with  him ;  but  the  laws  by  which  he  acts  on 
the  mind  are  natural.  The  upshot  of  the  whole  is, 
that  we  are  to  be  educated  into  Christianity.  We 
are,  from  our  earliest  years,  to  be  trained  in  the  nur- 
ture and  discipline  of  Christ.  Or  we  are  to  be  nour- 
ished in  the  discipline  and  instruction,  in  the  knowl- 
edge and  memory,  of  Christ. 

The  Christian  Church  is  a  great  school  for  the  in- 
struction of  the  race,  a  seminary  in  which  the  youth 
are  to  be  taught  divine  truth,  and  where  those  of 
mature  age  are  to  advance  to  perfection.  A  local 
church  is  as  a  town  school,  where  the  teacher  is  the 
minister,  and  all  the  parishioners  are  scholars.  Not 
that  these  analogies  cover  the  whole  ground,  by  any 
means.  We  are  all  brothers  and  sisters  in  Christ,  all 
kings  and  priests  unto  God.  We  are  all,  pastor  and 
people  alike,  learners,  disciples  of  the  Great  Teacher. 
But  throughout  the  whole  is  an  educational,  cul- 
turing  idea,  improvement  of  character,  development 
of  faculties,  growth  of  soul,  and  perfection  of  nature. 


192       EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

The  great  commission  still  is,  "  Go,  teach,  instruct, 
educate  all  nations."  Christ  announced  himself  as 
a  Teacher^  Instructor,  Educator,  sent  from  God. 

Man  is  not  depraved  ;  that  is  not  why  Christ  came. 
But  man  without  culture  sinks  to  Peter  the  wild  boy. 
Man  with  an  erroneous  culture  becomes  a  Thug  of 
India.  Man  with  an  imperfect  culture  is  Saul  of  Tar- 
sus. Man  with  the  highest  culture  is  Paul,  Newton, 
Fenelon.  Christianity  does  not  address  man  as  a  sin- 
ner merely ;  it  addresses  him  as  a  being  to  be  instruct- 
ed, as  a  being  with  faculties  to  be  unfolded,  with  a  life 
to  be  nurtured,  with  energies  to  be  directed.  It  ad- 
dresses him  with  truth,  and  comes  to  him  with  love. 
It  finds  Mary  weeping,  and  it  comforts  her ;  Mat- 
thew idle,  and  sets  him  to  work ;  Nicodemus  errone- 
ous, and  enlightens  him ;  the  Pharisee  hypocritical, 
and  upbraids  him.  It  never  addresses  childhood  as 
a  sinner,  but  as  the  very  type  and  semblance  of  its 
own  kingdom. 

We  become  what  we  are  educated  to  be.  If  we 
are  not  all  Christians,  it  is  because  we  have  not  been 
educated  rightly.  But  education  consists  of  two 
parts,  what  is  done  for  us,  and,  secondly,  what  we  do 
for  ourselves.  It  may  sometimes  be  that  w^hat  has 
been  done  for  us  is  right,  while  what  we  do  for  our- 
selves is  wrong. 

If  our  children  are  not  growing  up  Christians,  it  is 
because  they  are  not  being  rightly  educated.  We 
may  educate  them  rightly,  others  may  educate  them 
wrongly.  We  may.  give  them  a  good  education  in 
the  way  of  instruction,  and  a  bad  one  in  the  way  of 
example.     We  educate  by  remissness  as  well  as  by 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        193 

fidelity.  Our  inconsistencies  go  towards  the  train- 
ing of  our  children,  as  well  as  our  integrity.  If  there 
are  strange  and  absurd  notions  afloat  touching  re- 
ligion and  its  ordinances,  life  and  its  enjoyments,  it 
is  because  people  have  been  indoctrinated  with  these 
ideas.  They  would  never  have  got  them  in  any 
other  way. 

The  Christian  Church,  in  this  community,  seems 
to  have  lost  the  idea  that  its  great  object  is  to  edu- 
cate the  race,  to  train  souls  from  infancy  to  age  in 
divine  knowledge.  It  proceeds  on  the  supposition 
that  all  men  are  born  with  a  nature  totally  depraved, 
and  that  its  function  is  to  change  human  nature,  not 
to  culture  and  inspire  and  elevate  it.  It  does  change 
a  few,  and  these  few,  detached  from  all  the  relations 
of  life,  it  gathers  into  one,  keeps  them  separate  from 
the  rest,  and  makes  a  kind  of  school  of  them,  and 
calls  them  disciples,  that  is,  learners.  All  the  others, 
the  vast  majority  of  our  congregations,  are  regarded 
simply  as  sinners ;  they  are  not  in  the  school  of 
Christ,  —  even  the  little  children  are  not  in  it.  The 
Unitarian  Church  itself,  while,  indeed,  it  has  denied 
the  doctrine  of  a  depraved  nature,  has  never  yet,  in 
all  fulness  and  positiveness,  gathered  its  children  to 
the  central  nurture  and  admonition,  the  blessing  of 
which  itself  enjoys. 

It  is  as  easy  for  children  to  be  educated  into  Chris- 
tians, as  into  Jews,  or  Mohammedans,  or  Hindoos. 
Indeed,  if  we  may  trust  St.  Paul,  Christianity  is  a 
less  burdensome  and  easier  religion  than  Judaism. 
It  is  more  humane  and  liberal  and  spiritual,  and  is 
more  recommended  by  all  the  better  sentiments  of 

17 


194       EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

our  nature.  What  person  amongst  us  would  not 
rather  be  a  Christian  than  a  Jew  ?  Who  would  not 
rather  undertake  to  educate  his  child  a  Christian 
than  a  Jew?  Children  are  educated  Jews.  Chil- 
dren are  not  educated  Christians. 

It  is  utterly  impossible  for  any  church  to  do  its 
work  in  the  world  until  it  annihilates  these  traditional 
and  purely  conventional  distinctions  to  which  I  have 
referred.  It  must  be  one  common  school  for  the  cul- 
ture of  the  souls  of  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in 
the  parish. 

My  friends,  we  can  educate  our  children  into 
Christians  if  we  have  a  mind  to  do  it.  I  do  not  for- 
get the  agency  of  God.  This  is  the  great  work 
which  God  would  have  us  do,  what  he  commands 
us  to  do,  and  what  he  has  promised  to  bless.  We 
are  in  the  way  of  God's  will  when  we  do  our  part. 
I  cannot  do  this  alone,  nor  you  alone,  but  you  and  I 
can  do  it.  We  have  all,  parents  and  children,  in 
cant  phrase,  got  to  belong  to  the  Church,  to  be  of  it, 
every  one  of  us,  or  we  can  do  nothing.  We  have 
got  to  go  to  school,  to  belong  to  the  school  that  the 
Church  is  ;  we  have  all  got  to  assume  the  character 
of  learners,  scholars,  disciples,  or  we  cannot  so  be 
trained  and  educated.  We  can  do  just  nothing,  to 
have  a  collection,  a  gathering,  called  a  school,  when 
one  hundred  pretend  to  be  scholars,  and  four  or  five 
hundred  are  no  scholars  at  all.  We  are  to  help  edu- 
cate, train,  culture  one  another,  —  parents  their  chil- 
dren, husbands  their  wives,  the  pastor  the  people, 
and  Christ  the  whole. 

By   education    is   meant   not   merely  preaching ; 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        195 

every  church  service  has  an  effect  on  the  soul,  —  its 
worship  as  well  as  its  instruction,  its  communion, 
and  its  baptism.  The  soul  wants  food  just  as  corn 
does  to  make  it  grow.  Christ  is  the  great  aliment. 
We  must  all,  children  and  old  folks,  feed  on  Christ ; 
either  outiuardly  or  inivardly  we  must  all  partake  of 
the  communion.  No  man  can  grow  up  a  Christian, 
who  is  not,  either  outwardly  or  inwardly,  a  commu- 
nicant. I  never  expect  to  see  a  solitary  soul  saved, 
or  experience  the  true  Christian  life,  who  does  not 
partake  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  Sab- 
bath, the  Sunday  school,  the  birds  and  brooks,  all, 
all  help  to  culture  the  soul. 

"  Do  the  best  we  can,  there  are  error  and  vice  in 
the  world  that  may  counteract  our  endeavors."  Cer- 
tainly, certainly.  But  we  have  two  things  to  do  : 
first,  to  train  our  children  in  virtue ;  second,  so  train 
them  that  they  will  resist  the  temptations  to  vice. 
First,  train  them  into  truth  ;  second,  so  train  them 
that  they  will  be  armed  against  all  the  assaults  of 
error.  There  is  yet  a  third  thing :  we  have  so  to 
train  our  children  that  a  part  of  their  mission  in  this 
earth  will  be,  not  alone  to  be  virtuous  and  truthful, 
but  to  promote  virtue  and  truth,  and  aid  in  overcom- 
ing vice  and  error. 

My  friends,  you  see  at  a  glance  the  whole  object 
of  this  Christ- Church, — why  I  am  settled  here  in 
the  ministry,  why  we  have  Sabbaths,  and  Sunday 
schools,  and  singing,  and  praying,  and  communing ; 
it  is  that  we  may  all  be  trained  up  Christians,  that 
we  may  be  growing  Christians ;  and  especially  it  is 
that  the  children  may  all  be  brought  up  in  the  nur- 


196       EDUCATION,   THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

ture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.  The  question  is 
not,  how  wicked  a  man  is ;  that  is  no  question  at 
all.  The  only  question  is,  Are  we  willing  to  be 
made  better,  to  improve,  to  receive  divine  culture  ? 
In  establishing  a  common  school,  you  never  ask 
how  ignorant  a  boy  is.  The  more  ignorant,  the 
more  need  of  schooling.  Without  schools,  the  whole 
nation  would  sink  into  barbarism ;  without  true 
Christian  schools,  we  shall  all  sink  to  the  lowest 
end  of  the  scale  of  being.  It  is  as  easy  to  train  up 
a  generation  of  Christians  as  a  generation  of  scep- 
tics and  blasphemers,  if  we  will  only  set  about  it. 

I  have  said,  the  grand  difference  in  human  beings 
is  that  of  culture,  culture  beginning  in  infancy.  I 
do  not  say  there  is  not  a  diversity  of  gifts,  and  of 
temperaments,  and  of  climates,  and  of  social  po- 
sitions, if  you  will ;  but  all  these  diversities  sink  into 
nothing  as  compared  with  those  generated  by  cul- 
ture. 

In  the  Church  we  shall  have  some  active  in  good 
works,  some  eloquent  with  tongues,  some  free  with 
their  money,  some  to  deliberate  and  some  to  execute, 
but  we  shall  be  Christians  still,  one  Holy  Spirit  per- 
vading and  uniting  the  body. 

I  have  said,  we  think  in  words.  We  begin  to 
speak  and  we  begin  to  think,  we  think  more  and 
more  words.  We  think  in  the  words  we  hear,  in  the 
words  our  mother  teaches  us.  What  is  this  ?  What 
an  affecting  position  I  What  an  amazing  responsi- 
bility!  What  words,  O  ye  fathers  and  mothers,  will 
you  have  your  children  think  in,  and  exercise  their 
thoughts    upon,    and   revolve    in    their   minds?     I 


EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW.        197 

will  give  a  brief  answer.  Every  child  must  begin 
to  think  in  such  words  as  these:  I  am  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  ;  I  am  a  Christian  ;  God  is  my 
Father  in  heaven  ;  Christ  is  my  lover  and  friend  ;  I 
am  to  grow  up  a  Christian. 

"  Was  there  ever  a  time,"  said  I  to  a  deacon's  son, 
brought  up  in  the  very  presence  of  the  family  altar, 
brought  up  in  full  view  of  the  Lord's  table,  —  "  was 
there  ever  a  time  when  you  could  say,  God  is  my 
Father  in  heaven  ;  I  am  his  child  ?  "  "  No,  never," 
said  he.  He  had  not  those  words  to  think  in,  to 
mould  his  spirit  in,  to  leaven  the  whole  substance  of 
his  nature.  "  No,"  said  he ;  "I  was  brought  up  to 
feel  that  if  I  met  with  a  change,  and  had  a  new  na- 
ture, then  I  could  call  God  my  Father,  and  myself  his 
child ;  but  that,  till  then,  I  was  only  the  child  of  sin 
and  Satan."  Those  were  the  words  given  him  to 
think  in,  given  him  by  his  own  father,  and  his  Sun- 
day-school teacher,  and  his  minister.  Within  six 
months  I  have  conversed  with  a  score  of  just  such 
people,  having  just  such  words  to  think  in,  and  to 
conform  their  souls  to,  —  words  of  death,  of  damna- 
tion, of  despair.  Is  it  a  wonder  nobody  prays,  no- 
body enjoys  spiritual  life?  We  have  corrupted  all 
the  fountains  of  a  true  life  in  infancy. 

Words  to  think  in,  —  Peter  had  no  words,  and 
he  never  thought.  Suppose  Dr.  Howe  had  taught 
Laura  Bridgman,  in  her  finger  language,  these 
words  :  "  I  am  an  undone  sinner,  my  heart  is  de- 
praved, I  hate  goodness,  God  is  not  my  Heavenly 
Father.  I  can  never  be  a  disciple  of  Christ  till  my 
nature  is  changed ! "     The  result  would  have  been 

17* 


198        EDUCATION,    THE    GREAT    CHRISTIAN    LAW. 

just  such  a  result  as  is  now  produced  on  the  minds 
of  all  the  boys  and  girls  of  Christendom. 

We  are  all  born  into  the  world  just  as  helpless  as 
Peter  the  wild  boy,  just  as  helpless  as  Laura  Bridg- 
man,  and  we  must  even  take  the  words  that  are 
given  us. 


SERMON    XI 


"WE    THINK   IN   WORDS." 

AS   HE   THIKKETH    IN   HIS   HEART,   SO   IS   HE.  —  PrOV.  XXiii.  7. 

From  the  turn  things  have  taken  with  us  result 
certain  aspects  and  relations,  perhaps  of  a  novel,  but 
certainly  of  a  grave  and  interesting  character.*  You 
have  become  a  Church,  and  your  children  are  recog- 
nized as  in  it  because  they  are  your  children.  We 
are  a  company  of  adult  and  infant  disciples,  scholars 
of  Christ.  What  then  ?  Is  that  the  end  ?  Nay, 
friends,  it  is  only  the  beginning.  Now  the  great 
work  of  our  life  fairly  commences,  to  be  continued 
through  time,  and  to  perpetuate  itself  in  the  endless 
years  of  our  futurity.  We  come  together,  pastor 
and  people,  to  aid  one  another  in  this  work.  From 
Sunday  to  Sunday  it  is  to  go  on,  in  all  the  routine 
of  our  days  its  fruits  are  to  be  developed  and  exhib- 
ited more  and  more.  What  is  this  work?  The 
answer  may  be  variously  phrased,  but  it  all  comes  to 
this.     The  salvation   of  our  souls,  the  maturity  of 


*  See  Appendix,  Note  B. 


200 

our  characters,  spiritual  life  in  Christ.  The  whole 
is  well  enough  expressed  in  the  language  of  our 
Church :  "  The  highest  Christian  culture,  spiritual 
birth  and  growth,  and  the  perfection  of  our  natures." 
In  a  word,  to  be  Christians.  This  explains  the  ob- 
ject of  our  whole  movement,  and  is  the  true  reason 
of  our  becoming  a  church,  and  assuming  the  position 
in  which  we  are.  "  We  will  seek  to  train  our  chil- 
dren in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord  " ; 
nourish  them  in  the  schooling  and  remembrance  of 
Jesus.  The  children  are  to  be  trained  up  for  God 
and  Christ.  The  results  we  aim  at  are  spiritual  life, 
or  the  life  of  God  in  the  soul.  The  means  by  which 
we  would  reach  them  are  nurture,  culture,  education. 
I  lay  this  down  as  a  general  principle,  that  the 
means  or  method  whereby  we  are  to  attain  the  high- 
est Christian  realizations,  or  the  true  end  of  our  be- 
ing, is  education,  culture,  or  nurture.  There  are 
three  things  :  first,  the  method  by  which  we  shall 
act,  education  ;  second,  the  objects  on  which  we 
act,  immortal  souls  ;  third,  the  end  for  which  we  act, 
the  Christian  maturity  of  those  souls.  Each  child 
of  the  Church  is  as  a  plant  just  sprouting  in  our 
gardens.  It  has  vital  energies,  but  it  needs  cultiva- 
tion,—  and  this  includes  nourishment,  tillage,  and 
every  species  of  attention,  —  in  order  that  it  may 
produce  flowers  and  fruit,  which  are  its  proper  des- 
tiny. Education,  then,  will  include  feeding  the  chil- 
dren with  spiritual  food,  nourishing  their  religious 
affections,  developing  the  higher  faculties,  repressing 
whatever  is  evil,  and  encouraging  whatever  is  good. 
The  children,  indeed,  have  vital  energies,  but  their 


201 

innate  vitality  requires  to  be  reinforced  by  the  life  of 
God,  or  they  will  come  to  naught,  even  as  Peter  the 
wild  boy  did,  —  even  as  a  plant  does  if  it  be  never 
watered. 

By  education,  I  am  aware,  I  use  a  scholastic 
rather  than  a  theological  word,  and  I  may  be  mis- 
understood. Let  me  explain.  By  this  term  I  do 
not  mean  mere  teaching  or  preaching,  but  all  those 
methods  whereby  the  soul  may  be  reached  and 
moved  to  due  action.  It  means  example,  social  in- 
fluence, historical  association,  the  Bible,  nature.  We 
educate  the  soul,  we  cultivate  a  plant.  Cultivation 
is  a  right  application  of  culturing  agencies.  We 
hoe  the  weeds,  loosen  the  soil,  apply  fertilizers,  all 
that  the  plant  may  grow  and  bear  fruit.  So  we 
work  upon  the  soul ;  we  arouse  its  faculties,  supply 
it  with  truth,  remove  its  errors,  that  it  may  grow  and 
bear  fruit.  We  would  give  to  the  children  a  fam- 
ily altar,  the  Sabbath,  pulpit  instruction,  worship, 
the  communion.  We  would  pray  with  them,  and 
teach  them  to  pray ;  we  would  furnish  them  with 
good  books ;  we  would  offer  them  the  facilities  of 
the  Sabbath  school.  All  these  are  things  education 
would  do. 

Does  this  scheme  forget  the  agency  of  God  ?  By 
no  means.  It  gives  God  to  the  children,  his  knowl- 
edge, his  love,  his  character.  We  claim  it  is  the  very 
w^ay  God  would  have  us  adopt,  and  feel  that  it  is 
that  which  his  blessing  will  follow.  But  should  we 
not  rather  seek  to  sanctify  than  to  educate  the  chil- 
dren ?  They  are  already  sanctified,  consecrated  to 
God,  by  birth   and  by  baptism.      The   children  of 


202 

believers,  the  Apostle  tells  us,  are  holy.  But  we 
would  educate  them  into  complete  and  full  sanctifi- 
cation.  The  perfection  of  the  soul  cannot  be  reached, 
we  insist,  without  training.  The  whole  system  in- 
cludes prayer,  and  self-examination,  and  meditation, 
and  attendance  on  the  ordinances. 

With  this  brief  explanation,  let  me  enter  upon 
the  general  subject.  I  opened  it  the  last  Sabbath. 
I  showed  we  became  what  we  were  educated  to  be, 
and  that  we  might  become  Christians  by  being  edu- 
cated to  be  Christians  ;  that  if  you  train  up  a  child 
in  the  way  he  should  go,  when  he  is  old  he  will  not 
depart  from  it.  I  purpose  at  the  present  time  to 
take  up  some  particulars  of  the  general  law.  I  said, 
we  think  in  words.  Let  us  attend  to  this.  It  is  the 
opinion  of  philosophers  that  we  think  in  words.  M. 
Lavoisier  quotes  the  observation  from  Condillac, 
and  Dugald  Stewart  indorses  it,  that  we  think  only 
through  the  medium  of  words.  At  least,  if  I  rightly 
apprehend  what  has  been  written  on  the  subject,  it 
is  agreed  that  all  processes  of  reasoning  are  conduct- 
ed in  this  way.  If  you  recall  the  movements  of  your 
own  minds  for  a  day  or  an  hour,  I  think  you  will 
perceive  that  your  thoughts  are  continually  clothing 
themselves  in  words. 

There  are  certain  qualifications  to  the  general 
rule.  We  think  in  words  that  we  hear ;  that  is,  we 
think  in  the  sound  of  words.  We  think  in  words 
that  we  see  ;  that  is,  we  think  in  the  sight  of  words. 
One  who  cannot  read,  and  knows  not  how  words  are 
spelt,  is  thinking  in  different  words,  so  to  say,  from 
one  who  can  read.     I  am  not  sure,  also,  that  we  do 


203 

not  think  in  the  images  of  things  we  have  seen.     We 
may  think  of  a  waterfall,  landscape,  twilight,  in  the 
images   of  those  things  already  lying  in  the  mind. 
We  think  chiefly  through  words  conveyed  to  us  by 
the  eye,  the  ear,  and  the  imagination.     A  blind  per- 
son cannot  think  in  words  conveyed  by  the  eye  ;  or, 
as  I  might  say,  in  visible  words.     A  deaf  person  can- 
not think  in  words  conveyed  by  the  ear  ;  that  is,  in 
audible  words.     A  deaf  mute  cannot  think  in  words 
conveyed  through  either  medium,  and  as  most  words 
are  conveyed  in  one  way  or  the  other,  such  a  person 
has  but  few  words  to  think  in.     Laura  Bridgman 
was  deaf,  dumb,  blind,  and  with  only  a  limited  sense 
of  smell,  and  she  had   almost  no  words  to  think  in. 
Her  sense  of  touch  was  exquisite,  and  all  her  words 
were  of  the  tangible  sort.     That  is,  the  few  words  she 
had  took  the   shape  imparted  by  touch  ;  she  could 
have  no  other  thoughts  but  those  of  density,  elonga- 
tion, heat,  roughness,  &c.    After  Dr.  Howe  had  taught 
her  the  finger  language,  she  was  often  found  talking 
to  herself  with  her  fingers.     Peter  the  wild  boy  had 
eyes  and  ears  and  all  the  senses,  but  he  never  heard 
or  saw  a  word,  and  of  course  never  spoke  a  word, 
and  had  no  words  to  think  in.     Some  cries  of  ani- 
mals he  had  heard,  and  these  he  imitated.     Perhaps 
a  cry  for  hunger ;  and  when  he  was  in  the  woods, 
it  may  be  he  uttered  that  cry,  and  perhaps  thought 
in  it.     He  saw  water,  trees,  stars,  and  these  images 
came  into  his  mind,  but  only  as  mere  blank  surfaces. 
In  my  discourse  a  year  or  two  since,  on  language, 
I  showed  it  was  impossible  to  invent  a  language.     If 
persons  have  no  language  given  to  them,  they  never 


204 

come  to  the  possession  of  one,  since  they  cannot 
create  one  of  themselves.  But  again,  if  we  have  no 
words  we  have  no  ideas,  or  as  a  general  thing  our 
ideas  and  thoughts  are  proportioned  to  the  words  we 
have.  Thought  is  developed  along  with  the  power 
of  speech.  Peter  could  never  speak,  and  he  had  no 
thoughts,  no  true  intellectual  life.  Laura  Bridgman 
improved  just  in  proportion  as  ideas  were  conveyed 
to  her,  or  as  her  own  capacities  were  developed  ;  and 
this  was  done  by  giving  her  words,  that  is,  by  cloth- 
ing ideas  in  material  outline  and  so  communicating 
them  to  her  through  her  sense  of  touch. 

We  think  in  words ;  but  we  think  in  such  words 
only  as  are  given  to  us.  We  cannot  get  them  of 
ourselves.  In  this  matter,  primarily  and  in  the  out- 
set of  things,  we  are  perfectly  helpless,  passive.  Our 
children  think  in  such  words  as  we  give  them,  and 
no  other.  We  may  give  them  bad  words  or  good 
words,  suggestive  or  jejune,  elegant  or  coarse,  they 
are  entirely  at  our  mercy ;  we  overwhelm  them  as 
by  an  absolute  fate.  Our  children  think  in  English 
words,  German  children  in  German  words,  Indian 
children  in  Indian  words ;  and  there  is  no  help  for  it. 
By  unalterable  ordinance  of  the  Almighty,  it  must 
be  so ;  our  children  cannot  think  in  Arabic,  nor  an 
Arab's  child  in  English.  A  blasphemer's  children 
think  in  blasphemous  language,  a  child  born  at  the 
Five  Points  thinks  in  Five  Points  language,  the 
child  of  a  reverential,  loving  family  thinks  in  rever- 
ential, loving  language. 

Next,  as  to  the  character.  It  is  proven  that  the 
development  of  thought  is  proportioned  to  the  de- 


205 

velopment  of  speech,  and  the  development  of  charac- 
ter is  proportioned  to  the  development  of  thought. 
Hence  the  truth  of  our  text.  As  a  man  thinketh,  so 
is  he.  But  we  think  in  words,  and  in  such  words  as 
are  given  to  us  ;  hence  it  follows  that  the  character 
of  every  human  being  is  more  or  less  determined  by 
the  words  that  shall  be  given  him.  This  at  least 
applies  to  the  state  of  childhood  and  infancy.  This 
appears  in  the  cases  I  have  cited.  Peter,  in  a  sense, 
had  no  character,  no  moral,  or  religious,  or  intellec- 
tual character  ;  no  aspirations,  no  humility,  no  hope, 
no  reason  ;  I  mean  next  to  none.  The  germs  of 
these  things  were  all  in  him  by  nature,  but  they 
were  never  born.  He  had  no  regeneration  or  birth 
of  the  spirit.  He  conformed  in  all  respects  to  the 
brute  beasts  with  whom  he  dwelt. 

But  to  show  how  character  depends  on  the  words 
we  think  in,  consider  what  is  in  those  words.  Almost 
all  the  ideas  the  world  has  ever  had,  or  ever  will  have, 
are  comprised  in  words.  History,  science,  theology, 
are  contained  in  words.  The  Bible,  the  constitution 
of  our  country,  are  thus  vocalized.  Words  are  the 
gates  that  let  into  the  soul  the  flood  of  ideas.  "  Lan- 
guage," says  Lord  Bacon,  "  is  often  called  an  instru- 
ment of  thought ;  it  is  also  the  nutriment  of  thought ; 
or  rather  it  is  the  atmosphere  in  which  thought  lives  ; 
a  medium  essential  to  the  activity  of  our  specula- 
tive powers  ;  and  an  element,  modifying  by  its  qual- 
ities and  changes  the  growth  and  complexion  of  the 
faculties  which  it  feeds.  In  this  way  the  influence 
of  preceding  discoveries  on  subsequent  ones,  of  the 
past  upon  the  present,  is  most  penetrating  and  uni- 

18 


206 

versal.  The  most  familiar  words  and  phrases  are 
connected  by  imperceptible  ties  with  the  reasonings 
and  discoveries  of  former  men  and  distant  times." 
"  Language  is  the  embodiment,  the  incarnation,  of 
the  feelings,  thoughts,  experiences,  of  a  nation,  yea, 
of  many  nations,  and  of  all  which  through  centuries 
they  have  attained  to  and  won.  It  is  the  amber  in 
which  a  thousand  precious  and  subtle  thoughts  have 
been  safely  imbedded  and  preserved." 

Words  or  language,  I  say,  mould  the  character. 
If  a  language  is  rich  in  history,  poetry,  philosophy, 
the  education  or  development  of  the  child  is  propor- 
tionably  rich.  There  is  what  is  called  Thieves'  Latin, 
or  the  flash  language  used  among  robbers.  Let  us 
suppose  these  robbers  to  be  married,  and  live  in  fam- 
ilies, and  talk  their  peculiar  language  to  their  chil- 
dren ;  these  children  begin  to  think  in  that  strange, 
perverted  dialect,  and  their  character  is  insensibly 
shaped  by  it. 

I  say,  language,  or  the  use  of  articulate  speech, 
tends  to  develop  all  the  powers.  I  cannot  say  that 
a  child  does  not  think  before  it  speaks  ;  but  as  soon 
as  it  begins  to  speak,  its  thought  is  much  more  ac- 
tive and  precise.  Speech  reacts  upon  thought,  and 
thought  upon  speech.  Words  are  signs  or  forms,  or 
images  of  thought,  and  when  you  have  given  a  child 
words,  you  have  given  it  signs  or  forms  or  images  to 
think  in.  A  child  thinks  in  words  before  it  can  speak 
them,  because  it  hears  and  after  a  sort  understands 
them.  I  cannot  exactly  describe  the  process,  nor  is 
it  needful  that  I  should.  The  words  sink  into  the 
child's  mind,  and  become  pictures  of  the  things  to 


"  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS."  207 

which  they  belong.  They  enter  into  its  moral  con- 
sciousness and  exert  a  stimulating  power.  The  word 
mother  carries  with  it  the  idea  of  mother,  and  the  word 
remains  in  the  memory  when  the  object  it  represents 
is  absent.  As  children  begin  to  speak,  the  vocal  or- 
gans are  developed,  and  the  use  of  these  organs  calls 
in  play  almost  every  faculty  of  the  mind.  To  speak 
correctly,  even  a  little  child  must  think  correctly. 
The  use  of  one  word  rather  than  another  implies 
that  the  power  of  analysis  begins  even  in  early  years. 
Words  do  not  merely  convey  information,  they  act 
silently  upon  the  mental  faculties;  they  are  what 
we  use  in  all  moments  of  reflection.  We  reason  in 
words,  we  compare  in  words,  we  resolve  in  words, 
we  pray  in  words  ;  I  mean  in  these  latent  soul-words. 
Convictions  and  impressions,  remaining  with  us, 
write  their  own  names  at  full  length  on  the  tablet 
of  the  heart. 

But  to  apply  these  things,  how  is  it  that  one  man 
grows  up  Peter  the  wild  boy  and  another  a  New- 
ton, one  a  Mohammedan  and  another  a  Jew  ?  We 
say,  it  is  primarily  and  fundamentally  education  ; 
and  education  in  this  connection  means  the  use  of 
words,  or  the  teaching  of  one  set  of  words  rather 
than  another.  A  Mohammedan  child  hears  Moham- 
medan words,  a  Jewish  child  Jewish  words.  These 
Mohammedan  words  are  full  of  Mohammedan  ideas, 
Mohammedan  doctrine,  history,  theology;  suggest 
Mohammedan  images.  These  are  a  source  of  moral, 
intellectual,  spiritual  life  to  the  child.  Hence  his  life 
is  Mohammedan  life,  and  he  grows  up  a  Mohamme- 
dan man.     So  of  the  Jews.    So  of  others.    All  these 


208 

nations,  in  the  administration  of  their  religion,  begin 
with  the  cradle.  The  Jews  were  directed  in  this 
wise :  "  Ye  shall  lay  up  these  my  words  in  your  heart 
and  in  your  soul,  and  bind  them  for  a  sign  upon 
your  hand,  that  they  may  be  as  frontlets  between 
your  eyes ;  and  ye  shall  teach  them  unto  your  chil- 
dren, speaking  of  them  when  thou  sittest  in  thine 
house,  and  when  thou  walkest  by  the  w^ay,  when 
thou  liest  down,  and  when  thou  risest  up ;  and  thou 
shalt  Write  them  upon  the  door-posts  of  thine  house, 
and  upon  thy  gates."  You  see  what  provision  was 
made  for  keeping  the  words  of  the  Jewish  religion 
always  before  and  in  the  minds  of  the  people,  and 
these  words  were  all  communicated  to  the  children, 
and  these  were  the  words  from  their  first  years  those 
people  had  to  think  in ;  and  it  is  no  wonder  they 
all  grew  up  Jews. 

I  said  in  my  last  discourse,  it  was  as  easy  to  grow 
up  Christians  as  to  grow  up  Jews  or  Mohammedans, 
and  as  easy  to  train  up  a  generation  of  Christians  as 
a  generation  of  Jews  or  Mohammedans.  I  said,  if 
we  were  not  at  this  moment  Christians,  it  is  because 
we  have  not  been  rightly  educated,  either  in  respect 
of  what  others  have  done  for  us,  or  what  we  have 
done  for  ourselves.  And  all  turns  upon  this,  in  the 
infantile  stage  of  things,  in  the  first  awakenings  of 
moral  existence, —  the  words  we  have  to  think  in. 

Recollect  that  your  children  have  no  words,  and  no 
ideas  of  which  words  are  a  sign  ;  that  they  cannot  ac- 
quire words  of  themselves ;  that  they  must  take  such  as 
you  or  somebody  may  give  them,  and  no  others.  They 
lie  as  helpless  before  your  training  as  they  ever  lay 


"  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS."  209 

in  your  arms.  If  you  were  an  Indian,  they  would 
receive  your  Indian  words.  If  you  were  a  Hindoo, 
they  would  receive  your  Hindoo  words.  They  must 
not  only  receive  your  words,  but  the  ideas  that  are 
attached  to  them.  If  you  were  a  slaveholder,  and 
should  tell  your  little  children,  the  negroes  were  a 
degraded  race,  that  slavery  was  a  good  thing  and 
decreed  of  God,  they  would  receive  these  w^ords  and 
all  the  ideas  they  involve.  As  clay  in  the  hands  of 
the  potter,  so  is  every  little  child  in  the  hands  of  its 
parents. 

Everything  depends  on  what  is  now  done.  Let 
us  see  what  the  Jew  would  do.  He  would  teach 
his  child  that  he  was  a  Jew  or  Israelite,  that  he  was 
in  covenant  with  God,  that  he  was  holy,  that  the 
one  God,  who  in  the  beginning  made  heaven  and 
earth  and  supports  all  things  by  the  word  of  his 
power,  was  its  God.  The  child  does  not  understand 
all  this  ;  but  these  are  the  words  it  begins  its  moral 
life  with,  these  are  the  words  he  thinks  in  :  "  I  am  a 
Jew,"  "  I  am  holy,"  "  I  am  of  the  covenant,"  "  God 
is  my  God."  These  are  the  words  that  take  prece- 
dence of  all  others  in  the  child's  mind.  These  are  the 
ideas  that  enter  the  susceptible,  but,  so  to  say,  dor- 
mant soul  of  the  child,  and  infuse  into  it  their  own 
life.  These  are  the  signs  of  things  that  enter  the  so 
to  say  empty  brain  of  the  child,  and  fill  it  with  pic- 
tures. These  are  the  words  the  child  revolves  in  his 
mind,  these  are  the  words  of  his  dreams  ;  they  are  the 
seed  of  his  being,  they  enter  into  his  character,  and 
develop  him  into  a  full-grown  Jew. 

What  do  we  do  ?  What  do  parents,  and  Sunday- 
is  ^ 


210  "  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS." 

school  teachers,  and  ministers,  in  this  so-called 
Christian  community,  generally  do?  First  I  ob- 
serve, we  never  approach  children  in  the  direct,  pos- 
itive way  of  the  Jew  or  Mohammedan ;  we  act 
hypothetically,  hesitatingly,  negatively.  To  start 
from  the  extreme  Calvinistic  or  Augustinian  side,  and 
then  pass  from  that  to  our  own  position  :  it  is  said  by 
the  Calvinist  that  God  is  three.  For  what  purpose, 
or  in  what  manner,  no  parent  under  the  canopy  of  the 
sky  can  explain  to  the  child.  Now  what  sort  of  an  idea 
is  that  for  the  child  to  think  in,  or  mould  his  charac- 
ter upon  ?  Next,  as  to  God's  paternal  relation.  God 
is  your  Father  in  heaven  and  you  are  his  child,  is  the 
true  idea ;  that  is  the  positive  form  of  the  thing.  But 
do  children  get  those  words  ?  No  ;  they  are  told.  If 
you  become  good,  if  your  characters  change,  if  you 
get  a  new  heart,  then  you  will  be  God's  child.  Thus 
is  the  best  side  of  the  case  thrown  into  hypothesis, 
and  as  such  dealt  out  to  the  child.  But  there  is  a 
positive  side  to  Calvinistic  instruction.  It  is  this. 
You  are  a  sinner,  you  have  done  this  thing  wrong 
and  that  thing  wrong ;  we  do  not  know  that  you  are 
of  the  elect ;  you  are  out  of  the  covenant,  you  may 
die  and  go  to  hell.  These  are  the  words  multitudes 
are  giving  their  children  to  think  in.  "  Sinner," 
"  wickedness,"  "  hell,"  "  God  does  not  love  me," 
"  no  child  of  God " ;  —  these  are  the  words  given 
them  to  dream  upon,  to  see  new  meanings  in,  to 
enter  their  natures  as  the  quickening  agent  of  their 
moral  life. 

Now  as  to  our  own  children,  the  great  fact,  my 
friends,  is,  —  (although  we  mean  nothing  wrong,  no- 


"we  think  in  words."  211 

body  does,)  —  the  fact  is,  we  have  borrowed  our  habits 
of  instructing  children  from  those  about  us  ;  we  im- 
prove upon  the  method,  as  perhaps  we  fancy,  we  soften 
its  rigors,  but  we  embody  many  of  its  essential  features. 
We  have  very  little  directness  or  positiveness  of  style  ; 
we  never  dare  approach  our  children  in  the  full, 
open,  frank  way,  the  Jew  or  the  Mohammedan  does. 
For  instance,  we  do  not  tell  our  children  they  are 
Christians,  that  God  loves  them  and  they  are  God's 
children,  that  they  are  holy,  that  they  are  of  the 
Church,  or  in  the  covenant,  or  Christ's  disciples. 
We  too  approach  them  hypothetically ;  a  vision  of 
something,  we  hardly  know  w^hat  it  is,  like  the  birds 
by  the  way-side,  is  always  catching  up  the  truths  w^e 
sow,  before  they  take  root.  But  there  is  no  neutral 
ground,  we  must  tell  our  children  they  are  Christians 
and  holy,  or  that  they  are  not ;  we  have  got  to  give 
them  either  positive  Christian  w^ords  to  think  in,  or 
their  opposites.  I  suppose  we  generally  put  the  case 
problematically,  and  tell  children,  if  they  grow  up 
good  they  will  be  Christians,  and  God  will  love 
them.  The  Jew  begins  just  the  other  way.  He 
says  to  his  child,  you  are  a  Jew,  and  you  must  act 
like  one.  He  never  says,  If,  as  you  grow  up,  you  do 
right,  then  you  will  be  a  Jew.  In  other  w^ords,  we 
are  always  implying  in  our  own  minds,  or  in  the 
form  of  words  we  use,  that  some  change  or  revolu- 
tion in  the  future  must  ensue  before  the  child  can  be 
a  Christian,  or  holy,  or  a  lover  of  God,  or  in  the 
covenant. 

Here,  then,  is  that  which   diseases  all  our  instruc- 
tions, which  takes  their  vitality  out  of  them,  and 


212  "  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS." 

which  destroys  their  power  over  the  character.  We 
are  educating  children  on  an  hypothesis,  not  on  the 
direct  w^ord  of  God.  They  begin  their  days  on  an 
hypothesis,  and  continue  and  end  them  in  the  same 
w^ay.  "  If  I  should  meet  with  a  change,"  —  that  is 
the  current  phrase.  "  I  may,  I  may  not ;  I  will  wait 
and  see."  These  are  the  words  the  child  has  to 
think  in,  We  give  him  no  proper  foundation  to  rest 
upon.  We  do  not  plant  him  at  once  and  for  ever  on 
Christ.  The  child  wantons  through  the  world.  It 
never  knows  when  it  is  a  Christian,  or  w^hether  it  is 
or  not.  We  fling  its  character  out  on  a  fleeting  and 
uncertain  future,  as  a  swift  stream,  and  it  fetches  up 
when  and  w^here  it  may.  All  our  children  are  at 
this  moment  afloat,  just  as  we  started  them.  Heaven 
only  knowing  whither,  or  w^here  they  will  ever  land. 
Now,  what  children  need  is  positive,  affirmative 
Christian  words  and  Christian  ideas.  They  need 
these  at  the  very  first  dawning  of  intelligence,  and 
such  words  must  forestall  every  other  kind  of  words. 
Such  words  children  get  under  every  other  relig- 
ious dispensation  except  the  Christian.  Such  words 
they  get  with  us,  in  every  matter  excepting  Chris- 
tian nurture.  You  tell  your  child  she  is  your  child, 
that  you  are  her  mother,  that  you  love  her ;  these,  in 
the  family,  are  the  rich,  positive,  potent  words  your 
children  have  to  think  in.  You  never  address  your 
child  as  a  little  girl  of  uncertain  parentage,  who,  if 
she  grows  up  good,  and  meets  with  a  change,  may 
be  your  child.  You  always  say.  You  are  my  child, 
you  are  called  by  the  family  name,  you  belong  to 
the  family  covenant,  and  now  you  must  grow  up  a 


"  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS."  213 

good  child  ;  you  love  me,  I  love  you.  These  are  the 
positive,  affirmative  words  we  give  our  children  to 
think  in,  and  to  build  upon.  There  are  no  ifs  nor 
may-hes  in  the  case,  no  problems,  no  unsettling  of 
foundations.  So  in  state  matters,  we  always  teach 
our  children  positively,  affirmatively,  that  they  are 
republicans,  American  citizens,  in  political  covenant 
with  their  parents.  We  train  them  up  in  this  way 
of  thinking ;  and  when  they  are  old,  as  a  general 
thing,  they  do  not  depart  from  it.  A  man  wbo  vio- 
lates the  laws,  who  breaks  the  great  political  cove- 
nant, is  looked  upon  as  an  exception,  a  monstrosity, 
with  whom  your  child  has  nothing  in  common  ;  and 
you  always  teach  your  child  to  be  thankful  he  has 
not  been  left  to  do  such  things.  In  Church  or  Chris- 
tian matters,  everything  is  reversed.  "  We  are  all 
sinners,"  "  We  all  deserve  to  be  punished  together," 
"  We  are  all  violators  of  the  covenant."  These  and 
such  like  words  we  teach  our  children  in  the  earliest 
hour  of  their  intelligence. 

Here,  then,  is  the  bitter  root  of  all  we  mourn  over 
in  contemplating  the  religious  aspects  of  society  ; 
here  is  the  great  underlying  cause  w^hy  we  have  not 
grown  up  Christians.  We  have  instruction  enough ; 
we  have  Sunday  schools,  catechisms,  preaching, 
meetings ;  but  our  children  get  no  positive,  direct, 
affirmative  Christian  instruction.  I  venture  to  say 
there  are  not  ten  children  in  this  whole  city,  under 
ten  years  of  age,  who  dare  call  themselves  Chris- 
tians. We  are  ourselves,  w^henever  we  approach 
them,  always  halting  between  two  opinions.  The 
children  do  not  know,  spiritually  speaking,  whether 


214  "  WE    THINK    Ix\    WORDS." 

they  are  children  of  God  or  children  of  the  Devil. 
They  have  no  true,  positive,  intelligible  Christian 
words  to  think  in.  Here  is  your  little  babe,  born  of 
your  blood,  thrown  into  your  sphere,  open  to  your 
culture,  in  one  sense  blank  space,  a  tabula  rasa, 
empty  of  all  words,  all  ideas,  wholly  depending  on 
you  for  the  turn  its  being  shall  take.  It  may  with 
perfect  ease  become  a  Roman  Catholic,  a  Quaker, 
an  Indian,  a  believer  in  Juggernaut,  a  follower  of 
Baal  or  of  God. 

An  Indian,  I  say.  Let  me  relate  a  piece  of  his- 
tory. In  Colonial  times,  the  Indians  made  captive 
the  family  of  the  Rev.  John  Williams  of  Deerfield, 
Massachusetts,  and  took  them  to  the  wilds  of  Can- 
ada. These  persons  were  all  restored  to  their  homes 
excepting  the  youngest  daughter  of  Mr.  Williams, 
Eunice,  a  child  six  or  seven  years  old,  who  was 
adopted  into  an  Indian  family.  She  was  taught  the 
Indian  language,  inured  to  the  Indian  manners.  She 
lived  in  a  wigwam,  wandered  in  the  woods;  she 
wore  a  blanket,  leggins,  and  moccasons.  She  had 
no  books,  and,  if  she  could  ever  read,  probably  forgot 
how.  She  was  taught  the  Indians'  religion,  which 
at  that  time  contained  a  mixture  of  Romanism. 
She  married  an  Indian  husband,  and  bore  Indian 
children.  In  short,  she  had  Indian  words  to  think 
in,  Indian  ideas  for  her  soul  to  develop  in,  and  she 
became  an  Indian.  Nor  is  this  all.  A  few  years 
afterwards,  she,  her  husband,  and  family,  probably  at 
the  intercession  of  her  white  relatives,  came  to  Deer- 
field,  where  her  father  and  brothers  and  sisters  were 
then  living.     Her  friends  tried  to  induce  her  to  aban- 


"  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS."  215 

don  her  Indian  associations  and  ways,  and  return  to 
civilized  life.  One  Sunday  she  was  persuaded  to  put 
on  an  English  attire,  to  attend  church  in.  She  went 
to  church,  where  her  own  father  preached,  in  the  fore- 
noon. In  the  afternoon,  says  the  historian,  "  she 
indignantly  threw  off  her  gown,  and  resumed  the 
blanket.  She  would  go  back  to  the  woods.  No 
supplications  or  promises,  no  entreaties  of  parental 
affection,  no  earnestness  of  fraternal  love,  could  induce 
her  to  remain."  Her  own  father !  —  she  did  not  know 
him  ;  and  he,  wretched  man  I  must  behold  his  child, 
this  little  pet  child  of  his  memory,  this  last  child  of 
a  beloved  wife  who  perished  in  those  dreadful  wars, 
this  one  darling  of  his  heart  and  his  prayers  so  long 
mourned  over,  so  long  lost,  —  he  must  now  behold  her 
alienated  from  him,  separated  as  by  those  eternal 
barriers  that  divide  the  polar  wastes  from  the  culture 
and  fertility  of  tropical  life,  and  all  because  of  edu- 
cation. 

The  same  is  true  of  our  own  children,  —  we  may 
gain  them,  we  may  lose  them.  Every  little  child  in 
this  house  may  become  an  Indian,  a  Tartar,  a  Jew, 
or  a  Christian.  Of  course,  it  is  presupposed  that 
we  not  only  begin,  but  continue,  to  train  them  in  the 
right  way.  It  is  a  singular,  a  mournful  fact,  that 
multitudes  of  parents  among  us  commence  nearly 
right  with  their  children  when  they  are  young,  but 
they  soon  slide  off  into  the  prevailing  scepticism. 
There  are  mothers  who  teach  their  nurslings  to  pray 
"  Our  Father,"  but  in  eight  or  ten  years  the  habit  is 
is  entirely  abandoned;  the  mother  does  not  know 
whether  her  child  is  a  Christian  or  not. 


216  "  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS." 

As  I  said,  all,  primarily,  depends  on  the  words  we 
give  our  children  to  think  in.  And  these  words  must 
be  positive,  whole  words,  not  indecisive,  not  half- 
way expressions.  We  must  cease  to  be  sceptics 
ourselves,  and  become  believers.  We  must  leave  off 
this  don't-know  habit.  Ask  anybody.  Are  you  a 
Christian  ?  "I  don't  know."  Are  you  a  believer  ? 
"  I  don't  know."  This  "don't-know"  gets  into  the 
children,  and,  never  knowing,  they  never  are.  You 
give  your  children  indecisive  words,  and  you  render 
their  characters  indecisive.  But  w^e  are  so  afraid  our 
children  have  got  to  have  a  new  nature  before  any- 
thing can  be  done,  we  dare  not  touch  them.  We 
can  give  our  children  just  ivliat  nature  ive  choose  to 
give  them.  Let  an  Indian  take  your  child,  and  he 
wdll  give  it  an  Indian  nature  ;  let  a  Gypsy  take  it, 
and  he  will  give  it  a  Gypsy  nature.  If  you  will 
take  it  and  do  by  it  as  you  ought  to  do,  you  can, 
with  the  blessing  of  God,  give  it  a  Christian  nature. 
Not  that  the  essential  lineaments  of  its  nature  can 
ever  be  changed,  only  it  can  be  developed  in  a  Chris- 
tian or  any  other  way.  Christian  life  can  be  infused 
into  it,  or  heathen  ;  Christian  ideas  can  become  the 
seed  of  its  mind,  or  Jewish. 

I  said  in  my  last  discourse,  that  Christianity  is  the 
highest  culture  of  the  soul.  It  is  the  depository  of 
the  divinest  ideas.  It  is  a  river  of  water  of  life, 
clear  as  crystal,  flowing  from  the  throne  of  God  and 
the  Lamb,  at  which  all  may  drink  life  into  their  be- 
ing. It  causes  human  nature  to  grow  into  the  image 
of  Christ.  It  is  for  us  so  to  impart  it  to  our  children 
that  their  nature  may  assume  this  lofty  type.     This 


217 

is  what  I  mean  by  giving  our  children  what  nature 
we  please.  All  culture,  Pagan  or  Christian,  super- 
induces a  sort  of  second  nature  on  the  normal  con- 
ditions, or,  more  exactly  speaking,  develops  the  na- 
ture in  the  line  of  its  peculiar  ideas,  whatever  they 
may  be.  If  the  Christian  nature  be  a  secondary 
formation,  we  can  superinduce  that  upon  our  chil- 
dren. 

Christianity  gives  us  positive  words  that  we  are  to 
impart  to  our  children  to  think  in,  or  signs  of  posi- 
tive ideas.  Its  Sabbath,  its  baptism,  its  Lord's  Sup- 
per, are  all  signs  of  positive  ideas.  Its  doctrines  of 
the  one  God,  the  one  humanity,  of  love,  of  purity, 
of  peace,  of  forgiveness,  are  positive  doctrines.  In 
respect  of  children,  Christ's  words  are  most  direct 
and  explicit:  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven"  ; 
"  Feed  my  lambs."  "  The  promise  is  unto  you  and  to 
your  children,"  says  Peter.  "  Your  children  are  holy," 
says  St.  Paul ;  and  he  universally  addresses  the  chil- 
dren as  saints,  believers.  Christians.  See  how  copious 
is  the  supply,  and  how  momentous  the  application,  of 
positive  Christian  words  for  the  children.  "  This  do 
in  remembrance  of  me "  ;  —  this  applies  to  every 
child  as  much  as  to  any  human  being,  if  we  would 
have  it  grow  up  a  Christian.  "  I  must  do  that  in 
remembrance  of  Christ "  —  are  words  you  must  give 
your  children  to  think  in  ;  such  words  must  be  lodged 
in  their  memories,  be  ruminated  upon  in  their  leis- 
ure, and  give  shape  and  stimulus  to  their  spiritual 
growth.  This  is  not  to  be  qualified  by  conditions, 
or  set  aloof  in  the  limbo  of  scepticism.  And  this 
was  my  aim  a  few  weeks  since,  when  I  gathered  the 

19 


218 

children  before  me.  "  We  are  to  become  communi- 
cants," were  the  words  I  sought  to  lodge  in  their 
memories,  and  gave  to  them  to  think  in. 

But  more,  let  every  child  be  given  this  to  say  to 
himself,  to  commit  to  memory :  "  I  am  a  Christian." 
I  know,  my  friends,  we  start  at  this  ;  we  shudder  as 
if  we  saw  an  apparition  ;  we  wonder  what  the  world 
will  say.  But  to  this  complexion  we  must  come. 
Our  children  must  begin  life  by  being  Christians  ; 
they  have  got  in  the  very  start  to  feel  that  they  are 
Christians,  and  to  be  able  to  say  so.  "  I  am  a  Chris- 
tian "  —  are  the  words  they  must  have  to  think  in  ;  — 
the  w^hole  thing,  no  tampering,  no  half-way.  Your 
child  is  either  a  Jew,  a  Pagan,  or  a  Christian.  Or,  - 
if  you  please  to  teach  it  so,  it  is  neither  one  thing 
nor  the  other ;  and  give  it  those  words  to  think  in 
and  mould  its  character  unto,  and  it  will  become 
just  what  our  children  are  becoming,  neither  one 
thing  nor  another.  "  I  am  a  lamb  of  Christ,  Christ  is 
my  good  Shepherd,  I  am  to  be  fed  by  him  "  ;t— these 
words  are  to  go  explicitly,  emphatically,  into  the 
mind  of  the  child.  They  are  to  be  among  the  first 
Christian  words  he  hears,  and  to  be  among  those 
forces  whereby  his  whole  being  shall  be  wrought 
into  the  Divine  image.  That  the  child  is  a  disciple 
of  Christ,  a  student  of  the  Divine,  a  scholar  of  the 
Infinite,  he  is  in  the  same  way  to  know,  and  this 
should  constitute  one  of  his  earliest  lessons. 

I  have  said  that  children  can  be  trained  up  Chris- 
tians, and  am  now  trying  to  indicate  how  the  thing 
may  be  done;  and  I  repeat,  we  must  cease  training 
them  up  sinners,  or  pagans,  of  nothingarians;  we 


"we  think  in  words."  219 

must  give  them  a  positive  Christian  training.  In 
other  phrase,  instead  of  uncertain,  problematic,  Sa- 
tanic words,  we  must  give  them  full  and  positive 
Christian  words  to  think  in.  There  is  more  con- 
tained in  the  text  than  we,  perhaps,  imagined.  As 
one  thinketh,  so  is  he  ;  and  especially  as  the  child 
thinks  in  the  beginning,  so  will  it  afterwards  be. 

I  continue  the  inculcation.  "  God  is  my  Father 
in  heaven."  "  I  am  his  child."  "  God  loves  me." 
"  I  love  God."  Such,  again,  are  examples  of  these 
positive  religious  words  our  children  are  to  hear 
among  the  first  words  they  hear  at  all  about  God,  or 
see  printed  in  their  little  primers.  That  children 
may  grow  up  Christians,  they  must  grow  up  in  the 
nearest  possible  relationship  to  Christ.  That  they 
may  do  this,  they  must  grow  up  with  the  feeling 
that  Christ  is  their  dearest,  best  friend,  benefactor, 
shepherd,  deliverer.  For  this,  then,  these  blessed 
words  must  be  given  them  to  think  in.  Then  the 
child  must  know  that  he  is  a  branch,  a  twig  of  the 
vine,  a  member  of  the  body  ;  in  other  words,  that  he 
is,  as  we  say,  a  church-member  ;  that  he  belongs  to 
the  Church,  and  the  Church  belongs  to  him  ;  that  he 
is  in  and  of  the  Church.  These  are  words  and  ideas 
that  the  child  must  begin  its  thinking  in  :  "  I  am  a 
Church  boy,"  or  "  a  Church  girl." 

One  reason  why  words  are  so  powerful  is  because 
they  are  full  of  ideas.  This  word  C/«/rc/i,  —  what  a 
history,  what  a  future,  what  grandeur,  w^hat  recollec- 
tions, what  truths,  it  suggests  !  How  it  ascends  into 
heaven  !  how  it  sinks  into  the  deepest  heart  of  earth- 
ly goodness  I     You  give  this  word  to  your  child  to 


220  "  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS." 

think  in,  and  to  feel  in  ;  and  by  and  by,  in  the  course 
of  nature,  all  its  force  vitalizes  the  mind  of  the  child, 
and  erelong  all  its  vastness  uplifts  the  being  of  the 
child  to  its  own  proportions.  As  it  is  now,  we  are, 
to  speak  strongly,  killing  our  children  quite,  by  keep- 
ing from  them  that  which  is  so  pregnant  a  word,  so 
glowing  with  ideas  ;  that  is,  by  giving  them  neither 
the  Church  nor  any  true  Church  words  to  think  in. 
Here,  in  this  great  universe,  offspring  of  the  one  Cre- 
ator, with  natures  whose  true  development  would  be 
divine,  with  capacities  whose  stretch  no  archangel 
knows,  we  everywhere  are  hesitating  to  have  these 
little  ones  feel  and  know  and  think  and  say,  "  God 
is  my  Father;  I  am  his  child." 

My  friends,  we  become  what  we  are  educated  to 
be.  We  may  educate  or  train  our  children  to  be 
Christians,  and  they,  in  their  turn,  may  do  the  same. 
Human  nature  is  a  garden ;  we  may  raise  figs  or 
thistles  in  it.  We  may  cause  it  to  blossom  with 
roses  or  to  gloom  with  deadly  nightshade.  Mothers, 
this  work  must  begin  with  the  cradle  ;  it  must  enter 
the  nursery,  and  lay  its  foundations  deep  and  im- 
movable in  the  first  years  of  our  being.  The  new- 
born child,  a  stranger  here,  the  mystery  of  being  all 
before  it,  looks  out  upon  the  universe,  and,  we  may 
well  suppose,  asks  after  its  conditions.  Is  there  a 
God  for  the  child  ?  is  there  a  Church  for  the  child  ? 
is  there  a  Christ  for  it  ?  Then  tell  it  so.  Young 
mother,  on  whose  lap  lies  your  first  child,  that  child's 
lips  will  never  speak  until  you  teach  it;  its  mind 
will  never  think  until  you  teach  it ;  and  it  will  speak 
such  words  as  you  give  it,  and  think  such  thoughts 


221 

as  you  impart  to  it;  and  these  words  will  go  into  its 
mind  and  form  the  pabulum  of  its  growth.  It  may- 
lisp  the  name  of  Mohammed,  or  Moses,  or  Christ, 
just  as  you  shall  teach  it,  and  with  these  names  will 
enter  into  its  soul  all  those  innumerable,  but  inde- 
finable impressions  that  belong  to  them  respectively. 
Its  darling  desire  may  be,  as  it  grows  up,  to  roam 
the  forest  with  Eunice  Williams,  or  to  enjoy  the 
quiet  of  a  Christian  home,  just  as  it  shall  be  taught. 
If  you  hesitate,  the  child  will  hesitate  ;  if  you  doubt, 
the  child  will  doubt.  If  you  do  not  know  if  God  is 
its  Father  in  heaven,  it  will  not  know.  If  you  do 
not  know  if  it  is  a  Christian,  it  will  not  know  if  it  is 
a  Christian.  If  you  wait,  it  will  wait.  Wait,  do  I 
say  ?  Nay,  it  will  rush  on  somewhere  ;  the  world 
will  give  it  words  to  think  in,  if  you  do  not.  Its  de- 
velopment will  hasten,  God  only  knows  how ;  it  will 
grow  up  something,  if  not  a  Christian ;  and  when 
you  think  it  high  time  for  it  to  be  a  Christian,  it  will 
perhaps  be  gone  for  ever  beyond  your  grasp. 

We  have  been  hesitating,  many  of  us,  all  our 
lives,  about  this  whole  subject  of  religion,  Christian- 
ity, and  the  Church,  and  our  children  are  exact  cop- 
ies of  us,  every  one  of  them.  Do  you  say,  if  we  do 
as  well  as  we  can,  others,  the  community  about  us, 
will  spoil  all  our  work  ;  that  while  we  are  teaching 
our  children  good  words  to  think  in,  they  will  fill 
them  with  bad  words.  There  is  some  truth  in  this, 
but  not  all  truth.  Others  may  hinder  our  work,  they 
cannot  destroy  it.  But  I  have  so  charitable  an  opin- 
ion of  the  community  around  us,  as  to  believe  that, 
whenever  it  sees  us  really  determined  to  train  up  our 

19* 


222  "  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS." 

children  Christians,  they  will  be,  if  not  won  to  emu- 
lation, at  least  awed  into  silence. 

By  Christian  instruction,  in  this  connection,  as  I 
have  said,  I  do  not  mean  elaborate  discourse,  nor 
protracted  lessons,  but  a  few  words,  positive,  vital, 
eternal ;  a  few  words  out  of  that  great  repository  of 
divine  truth,  the  Bible  ;  words  that  come  flaming  to 
us  with  a  heavenly  meaning  in  them ;  words  that 
are  to  become  the  children's  words  ;  words  that  will 
begin  to  nourish  the  young  soul,  and  will  continue 
to  nourish  it  when  time  shall  be  no  more.  The 
creed  of  the  Mohammedans  is  very  brief.  "  God  is 
one,  and  Mohammed  is  his  prophet."  This  is  the 
initial  word  to  that  whole  system  ;  this  is  the  sim- 
ple nursery  word  that  lays  in  childhood  the  founda- 
tion of  that  wonderful  Mohammedan  faith  and  life. 
Such  words  as  these :  "  God  is  my  Father,  I  am  his 
child";  "  Christ  is  my  Shepherd,  I  am  his  lamb"  ; 
"  The  Church  is  my  company,  at  its  altars  I  com- 
mune ";  "  I  am  a  Christian,  and  am  to  be  like  Christ," 
—  brief,  simple,  —  are  enough,  only  they  must  be  pos- 
itive, direct,  soul-sufficing,  soul-illuminating  words, 
the  full  force  of  which  will  grow  upon  the  child,  just 
as  all  nature  does,  so  long  as  he  shall  live.  These,  and 
such  words,  must  precede  all  other  words,  withstand 
all  other  words,  and  never  give  place  to  other  words. 
No  matter  how  much  else  the  child  may  know,  or 
how  vast  may  be  its  acquisitions,  these  things  must 
lie  at  the  roots  of  his  being.  Away  with  this  pro- 
visoing  and  balancing,  away  with  this  dilly-dally  and 
hesitation.  We  make  the  word  of  God  of  none 
effect  to  the  children  ;  we  deal  with  them  at  arm's 


"  WE    THINK    IN    WORDS."  223 

length ;  we  treat  with  them  over  the  fence ;  we  im- 
agine a  great  gulf  between  what  they  are  and  what 
they  ought  to  be,  instead  of  seeing  the  royal  high- 
way which  marks  the  path. 

You  see,  as  I  have  told  you,  our  idea  of  the 
Church  does  not  trench  upon  the  Family.  The 
Family  nowhere  becomes  so  momentous  as  in  the 
light  of  this  idea.  In  one  sense,  all  my  burden  of 
the  Church  I  lay  down  at  your  feet,  ye  fathers  and 
mothers.  Nor  is  the  responsibility  a  fearful  one  ;  it 
is  simply  a  pleasant  and  a  natural  duty.  I  say,  give 
words  to  the  children  to  think  in.  Christ  is  called 
the  Word  of  God,  as  if  God  had  spoken,  and  the 
voice  took  shape  in  Christ ;  as  if  God  had  written  a 
book,  and  the  book  were  Christ ;  as  if  God  had 
graven  something  on  the  heart  of  humanity,  and 
that  something  were  Christ,  the  blessed  Word  of 
God.  Let  the  children  think  that  Christ  is  theirs, 
that  they  are  Christ's,  and  all  are  God's.  Train 
them  up  to  this  conviction,  and,  if  anything  in  the 
wide  world  will  tend  to  form  them  Christians,  I  am 
sure  this  will. 

Our  children  may  sin  and  fall  away  as  Peter  did ; 
they  may  backslide  and  go  into  captivity  as  the  Jews 
did  ;  but  we  shall  have  done  our  duty,  we  shall  have 
discharged  our  responsibility.  Yet  we  have  the 
promise,  if  we  train  them  in  the  ^vay  they  should  go, 
when  they  are  old  they  will  not  depart  from  it.  I 
know  man  is  evermore'  liable  to  fall ;  but  the  only 
course  by  which  we  can  prevent  our  children  from 
becoming  sinners,  is  to  train  them  to  be  Christians. 
The  only  way  to  keep  them  out  of  the  world  is  to 


224  "  WE    THINK    IN    AVORDS." 

train  them  up  in  the  Church  ;  the  only  way  to  save 
them  from  becoming  the  children  of  Belial,  is  to 
make  them  feel  that  they  are  the  children  of  Christ. 
As  they  think,  so  will  they  be.  If  they  think  in 
words  of  sin,  they  will  be  sinners ;  but  if  they  think 
in  the  words  of  Christ,  they  will  be  Christians. 


SERMON   XII 


THE  SABBATH  SCHOOL. 

CHARGE  THEM  THAT  THET  TEACH  NO  OTHER  DOCTRINE,  NEITHER 
GIVE  HEED  TO  FABLES  AND  ENDLESS  GENEALOGIES,  WHICH 
MINISTER  QUESTIONS,  RATHER  THAN  GODLY  EDIFYING,  WHICH 
IS    IN  FAITH.     NOW  THE    END    OF  THE  COMMANDMENT    IS    CHARITY 

[love]  out  of  a  PURE  HEART. —  1  Timothy  i.  3  -  .5. 

In  addressing  myself  to  the  teachers  of  our  Sun- 
day school,  let  me  premise  that  I  consider  it  a  de- 
partment of  the  Church,  coming  fully  within  the 
precinct  of  Church  influences  and  authority ;  it  is  a 
sort  of  seed-bed  and  nursery  of  the  Church.  One 
of  its  leading  objects  is  to  prepare  the  children  to 
be  mature  Christians,  true  Churchmen  and  Church- 
women.  I  hold  that  all  who  enter  the  Sunday 
school  do,  to  a  certain  degree,  commit  themselves 
to  the  Church,  and  to  a  Christian  life.  They  and 
the  Church  assume  certain  mutual  obligations  to 
each  other.  A  teacher  in  this  important  province  of 
the  Church,  as  he  is  a  nominal  Churchman,  so  also 
ought  he  to  be  a  sound  Christian.  He  -undertakes 
an  office  in  the  Church,  he  proposes  to  instruct  in  the 
knowledge  of  Christianity,  and  he  should  be,  in  the 
words  of  the  Apostle,  blameless,  vigilant,  sober,  apt 


226  THE  SABBATH  SCHOOL. 

to  teach,  gentle  unto  all,  in  meekness  instructing 
those  that  oppose  themselves,  holding  fast  the  faith- 
ful word  as  he  has  been  taught,  showing  himself  a 
pattern  pf  good  works. 

The  office  of  the  Sunday-school  teacher  is  a  kind 
of  delegated  pastorate.  He  deals  with  the  undergrad- 
uates of  religion,  he  takes  the  spiritual  meat  which 
is  served  to  the  people  generally,  and,  so  to  say,  cuts 
it  up  for  the  little  ones.  The  great  thing  to  be 
taught  is  Christianity;  not  in  the  artificial  shapes 
that  abound  on  every  hand,  but  just  as  we  find  it  in 
the  simple  text  of  Scripture.  And  when  I  say  Chris- 
tianity, I  mean,  of  course,  among  other  things,  moral 
duties.  These  are  a  part,  a  vital  and  integral  part, 
of  what  the  New  Testament  contains.  It  is  just  as 
much  a  part  of  Christianity  that  the  children  should 
love  one  another,  that  they  should  be  peacemakers,  for- 
giving, honest,  truthful,  as  obedience  to  any  precept 
that  can  be  found  in  the  same  grand  system.  Nor  do 
I  mean  by  the  term  Christianity  to  shut  out  all  refer- 
ence to  a  consideration  of  the  wide  field  of  illustration 
to  be  found  in  nature.  He  has  the  highest  authority 
for  availing  himself  of  resources  of  that  sort  in  the 
example  of  Christ  himself,  who  walked  with  his  dis- 
ciples through  the  corn-fields  and  led  them  by  the 
margin  of  the  waters.  Nay,  Christianity  cannot  be 
perfectly  taught,  I  think,  except  by  the  aids  derived 
from  the  phenomena  of  nature.  One  who  never 
saw  or  heard  of  the  grass  of  the  field,  of  the  vine,  or 
of  the  mustard-tree,  could  never  explain  intelligibly 
Christ's  doctrine  of  God's  providence,  the  Holy  Spirit, 
or  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 


THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL.  227 

It  is  incumbent  on  the  Sunday-school  teacher, 
who  is,  as  we  see,  a  Church  or  Christian  teacher,  a 
sub-minister  of  the  Gospel,  thoroughly  to  understand 
the  Scriptures,  and  get  as  deeply  as  may  be  into  the 
mind  of  Christ.  With  all  our  boasted  research,  free- 
dom of  investigation,  improvement,  progress,  there 
is,  after  all,  in  this  age,  in  this  country,  perhaps,  a 
certain  tendency  to  superficiality.  We  have  super- 
ficial farmers,  mechanics,  artists,  editors,  lawyers, 
physicians,  clergymen,  and  very  likely  superficial 
Sunday-school  teachers.  There  is  a  want  of  a  due 
understanding  of  the  thing  on  which  men  undertake 
to  act.  The  old  plan  of  apprenticeship  is  out  of 
vogue,  and  boys  quickly  come  to  be  journey- 
men, and  journeymen,  masters.  A  Sunday-school 
teacher  should  understand  his  business.  He  should 
make  himself  master  as  far  as  practicable  of  what 
he  teaches.  That  he  may  teach  Scripture  well,  he 
should  penetrate  the  meaning  of  Scripture.  That 
he  may  teach  Christ  well,  he  should  enter  into  the 
spirit  of  Christ.  Simple  adherence  to  question  and 
answer  in"*  a  text-book  will  not  suffice.  He  must 
explain,  compare,  illustrate,  and  enforce. 

The  Gospel  is  not  a  simple  book  to  us.  It  is 
wrapped  like  a  mummy  in  countless  folds  of  igno- 
rance and  mistake,  and  its  fresh,  beautiful  life  is 
smothered  and  wellnigh  lost.  Ages  of  misinterpre- 
tation obscure  it.  A  superstitious  light  gleams 
about  it.  We  approach  it  under  the  disadvantage 
of  all  the  wrong  education  we  have  received  from 
our  childhood  to  this  day.  I  could  sometimes  wish 
that  the   Sunday-school  teacher,  as  well   as  others, 


228  THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

might  for  a  moment  forget  that  he  had  ever  seen 
the  Gospel  of  Jesus,  so  that  he  might  go  to  it  as  a 
new  book,  a  new  history,  that  he  might  thus  experi- 
ence all  the  freshness  and  beauty  of  its  revelations, 
and  with  unbiased  mind  and  childlike  heart  en- 
deavor to  appropriate  its  great  truths.  It  is  of  the 
highest  importance  that  we  should  understand  the 
New  Testament,  for  the  reason  that  to  us  it  is  the 
sole  rule  of  faith  and  guide  of  life.  We  reject  the 
commonly  received  creeds  and  formulas  of  churches 
about  us,  and  betake  ourselves  to  the  simple  word 
of  God,  in  which  all-important  rules  of  duty  and 
forms  of  faith  are  simply  expressed. 

The  teacher  should  love  to  teach.  He  should 
cherish  a  deep  interest  in  divine  truth,  in  the  souls 
of  his  pupils,  and  in  all  things  connected  with  his 
vocation.  There  are  difficulties  to  encounter,  dis- 
couragements to  face,  and  nothing  but  a  hearty  love 
of  teaching  can  carry  him  through  them  all.  He 
should  devote  a  portion  of  every  week  to  preparation 
for  his  Sunday's  work.  He  should  give  specific  at- 
tention to  the  Scripture  lesson.  If  the  life  of  Christ 
is  his  great  theme,  let  him  sympathize  with  Christ, 
and  aim  to  communicate  that  sympathy  to  his  pu- 
pils. Let  him  not  tread  indifferently  on  that  holy 
ground,  or  pass  coldly  over  those  touching  topics. 
Did  Christ  go  down  into  Samaria?  Where  was 
Samaria  ?  Who  were  the  Samaritans  ?  What  was 
their  relation  to  the  Jews  ?  Wherein  lies  the  great 
interest  of  that  particular  movement  of  Jesus  ?  Let 
the  teacher  deeply  ponder  on  things  like  these.  Is 
Christ   preaching   to   the   people?     Let  your   own 


THE    SABBATH    HCHOOL.  229 

heart  be  amazed  at  his  doctrine.  Does  he  pluck 
corn  on  the  Sabbath  day  ?  Let  the  children  under- 
stand from  this  that  duty  and  right  are  not  to  be 
postponed  to  expediency  and  conventionality. 

There  is  another  point  on  which  I  wish  to  offer 
some  suggestions.  It  is  involved  in  the  question 
whether  you  should  teach  the  children  doctrines. 
On  the  supposition  that  we  have  a  right  idea  of  the 
term,  I  answer,  Yes,  by  all  means.  Let  the  children 
be  indoctrinated.  Let  no  child  ever  leave  the  Church 
Sunday  school  without  being  thoroughly  informed 
in  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Church.  But  what  do  we 
mean  by  doctrines  ?  As  has  been  already  indicated, 
I  mean  the  simple  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God, —  all 
that  of  which  the  Gospel  is  at  once  the  basis,  es- 
sence, and  repository.  I  mean  Christian  doctrines, 
that  is,  doctrines  which  Christ  taught.  I  mean 
evangelical  doctrines,  that  is.  Gospel  doctrines.  I  do 
not  mean  what  ordinarily  passes  under  the  name  of 
doctrines.  I  mean  Gospel  doctrine,  which  is  simply 
Gospel  teaching. 

But  do  I  mean  Unitarian  doctrine  ?  I  mean  pre- 
cisely that.  And  what  is  Unitarian  doctrine  ?  It  is 
what  Christ  taught.  Unitarian  doctrines  are  Chris- 
tian doctrines,  evangelical  doctrines,  Christ's  doc- 
trines, —  no  more,  no  less.  But  does  the  question 
still  return.  What  are  Unitarian  doctrines  ?  The 
answer  itself  resolves  into  a  question.  Did  Christ 
teach  anything  ?  Did  he  utter  any  important  truth  ? 
Did  he  announce  any  great  principle  ?  If  he  did, 
that  is  Unitarian  doctrine.  Did  Christ  leave  any 
enduring  impressions  on  the  minds  of  his  immedi- 

20 


230  THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

ate  disciples?  Did  John,  or  Peter,  or  Martha,  or 
Mary,  derive  any  appreciable,  interesting,  or  solemn 
lessons  or  idfeas  from  him  ?  These  are  Unitarian 
doctrines.  Did  they  believe  in  anything,  or  have 
faith  in  anything?  That  is  our  belief,  our  faith. 
You  are,  then,  to  teach  what  Christ  taught,  and  that 
is  Unitarianism.  I  speak  advisedly.  It  is  the 
beauty  and  the  boast  of  Unitarianism,  that  it  takes 
off  those  folds  which  have  been  wrapped  about  the 
Gospel,  exhumes  the  sacred  page,  and  lets  us  have  it 
in  its  original  and  undiminished  glory. 

Here,  now,  we  come  to  an  understanding  of  some 
things.  In  one  of  those  creeds  which,  at  some  for- 
mer time,  I  quoted  to  you,  it  is  asserted  that  Christ 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  are  God ;  and  that  is  called  a 
doctrine.  In  another,  it  is  set  down  that  man  is  to- 
tally depraved  ;  and  that  also  is  called  a  doctrine. 
Such  statements  are  pronounced  Christian,  evangel- 
ical, orthodox  doctrines,  and  they  are  taught  as 
such  in  the  neighboring  Sunday  schools.  Now,  in 
this  sense,  we  have  no  doctrines.  We  have  no  doc- 
trines independent  of  and  aside  from  the  plain  teach- 
ings of  Christ,  such  as  I  shall  insist  those  just  re- 
ferred to  are. 

Did  Christ  teach  that  he  was  supreme  God  ? 
Granting  that,  to  some  minds,  there  are  obscure 
hints  of  such  an  idea  in  the  Bible,  granting  that 
there  is  here  and  there  a  passage  not  readily  to  be 
explained  on  any  other  hypothesis,  still,  did  Christ 
teach  that  fact  ?  That  is  the  question.  Did  he 
clearly,  plainly,  professedly  teach  any  such  thing? 
Whereabouts  ?     I  have  studied  the  New  Testament 


THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL.  231 

not  a  little,  and  I  never  saw  the  passage.  He  did 
teach  some  things  clearly,  plainly,  professedly,  and 
those  we  gladly  believe ;  he  did  not  teach  the  Trin- 
ity, and  we  do  not  believe  it. 

Again,  as  to  total  depravity  ;  did  Christ  teach  that 
doctrine  ?    When  and  where  ?    By  coupling  together 
every  allusion  to  the  wickedness  and  errors  of  man 
from  Genesis  to  Revelation,  you  may  possibly  make 
out  the  semblance  of  such  a  doctrine  ;  but  did  Christ 
teach  it  ?     How,  then,  can  we  ?     And  here   I  may 
observe  that  the  Romanists,  the  largest  and  oldest  of 
the  nominal  Churches,  do  not  pretend  that  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Trinity  is  taught  in  the  New  Testament. 
They  hold  it  as  one  of  the  traditions  of  what  they 
call  the  Church.     This  leads  me  to  say,  that  all  these 
dogmas  belong  to   those   "other  doctrines"  which 
Paul  charged  Timothy  not  to  have  taught.     They 
belong  to  a  class  of  "  fables  and  genealogies,"  tra- 
ditions   of  the    elders,    "which    minister    questions 
rather  than  godly  edifying."     Observe  what  a  char- 
acterization is  here  I     What  a  test  by  which  we  may 
know  the   true   from  the   false.     "  Which    minister 
questions."     What  questions,  what  disputes,  there 
have  been  about  these  points  of  the  Trinity  and  total 
depravity  I     How  has  the  Church  been  in  an  endless 
ferment  on  these  subjects !     "  A  genealogy  "  !  —  how 
strictly  does   that  term   apply  to   this   tenet  of  the 
Trinity,  involving  the  generation  of  Christ  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost;  the  question  whether  Christ  was 
really  God,  or  was  generated  of  God,  as  light  from 
the  sun  ;  and  w^hether  the  Holy  Ghost  was  derived 
from  God  the  Father  or  God  the  Son,  or  both,—  a 


232  THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

purely  genealogical  question  !  "  Fables,"  too,  — 
myths,  —  could  the  Apostle  have  described  these 
things  in  more  appropriate  language  ? 

But  what  is  the  great  Unitarian  doctrine  ?  You 
mean,  rather,  what  is  the  great  doctrine  of  Christ, 
and  of  Christianity  ?  or  what  did  Christ  most  em- 
phatically, elaborately,  and  plainly  teach  ?  The 
Apostle  seems  to  furnish  an  answer  to  this  question 
in  our  text.  "  Now  the  end  of  the  commandment,"  he 
says,  "is  love,  out  of  a  pure  heart."  He  cautions 
Timothy  as  to  what  should  not  be  taught,  and  then 
impresses  on  him  what  is  the  sum  and  substance  of 
all  teaching  and  doctrine,  namely,  love  out  of  a  pure 
heart.  This  is  the  end  of  the  commandment,  the 
grand  consummation  of  the  whole  matter;  all  vital- 
ity, all  essentiality,  all  fundamentalness  of  doctrine 
and  belief,  is  contained  in  this.  This  is  the  fulfilling 
of  the  law ;  and  Paul  elsewhere  seems  to  speak  as 
if  he  did  not  know  there  was  any  other  command- 
ment. 

To  return  now  to  the  question.  Shall  we  teach  the 
children  doctrines?  I  reply,  Yes!  But  what  are 
doctrines  ?  I  have  given  you  specimens  of  what  are 
called  doctrines,  what  are  everywhere  taught  for 
such,  and  professedly  believed.  But  they  are  what 
the  Apostle  calls  fables  and  genealogies,  what  Christ 
calls  traditions  of  men.  They  are  not  the  genuine 
Christian  doctrines ;  they  are  not  Unitarian  doc- 
trines. I  have  just  given  an  instance  of  a  Unitarian 
doctrine,  —  love  out  of  a  pure  heart ;  and  this  doc- 
trine I  want  teachers  in  the  Sunday  school  to  teach. 
I  want  you  to  teach  it  as  one  of  the  great,  cardinal 


THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL.  233 

docti'ines  of  the  Unitarian  Church,  to  teach  it  as  a 
most  vital,  searching,  paramount  doctrine  of  Chris- 
tianity. You  should  inculcate  it  as  that  on  which 
all  the  law  and  prophets  hang,  for  the  voice  of  inspi- 
ration tells  us  it  is  so.  The  faithful  teacher  will  tell 
the  children  how  love  to  God  and  love  to  man  fulfils 
the  law;  he  will  show  chapter  and  verse  in  the  Bible 
where  it  is  said,  "  He  that  loveth  is  born  of  God  "  ; 
he  will  impress  upon  their  minds  how  this  love  is 
greater  than  faith  or  hope,  greater  than  all  conceiv- 
able things ;  he  will  demonstrate  to  them  what  are 
the  fruits  and  evidences  of  it ;  he  will  instruct  them 
in  the  methods  of  preserving,  strengthening,  and 
increasing  this  chiefest  of  Christian  graces.  In  a 
word,  he  will  indoctrinate  them  in  this  doctrine.  He 
will  so  thoroughly  indoctrinate  them  that  they  will 
all  know  the  essential  element  and  groundwork  of 
their  faith  ;  and  should  any  one  ask  them  what  they 
believe,  or  what'  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Unitarian 
Church,  they  will  at  once  and  comprehensively 
reply,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  thy 
neighbor  as  thyself." 

But  while  love  is  chief,  it  is  only  one  of  our  doc- 
trines. There  is  the  great  and  goodly  doctrine  of 
the  Divine  Unity.  This  primarily  means  that  God 
is  one,  that  he  has  no  equal.  The  teacher  will  show 
the  child  how  the  Bible  asserts,  and  nature  in  all  its 
manifestations  confirms,  this  doctrine.  But  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Divine  Unity  means  much  more  than 
this  ;  it  expresses  other  ideas  besides  the  nature  of 
God.  Unity,  Unitarianism,  a  most  pregnant  word, 
if  you  but  consider  its  scope  and  amplitude,  runs  all 

20* 


234  THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

through  the  Bible.  "  Hear,  O  Israel !  The  Lord  our 
God  is  one  God."  That  is  Unitarianism.  "We  have 
one  God,  the  Father,  one  Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  one 
faith,  one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who 
is  above  all  and  over  all  and  in  you  all.  This,  again, 
is  Unitarianism.  Unitarianism,  Unityism,  Oneness, 
all  mean  the  same  thing.  This  word  Unitarian  is  a 
glorious  word,  of  a  vast  and  most  comprehensive 
scope.  "  Unite  "  is  from  the  same  primitive,  and  the 
famous  word  "Atonement"  is  descended  from  the 
same  stock.  Christ  prays  that  we  all  may  be  one 
together  with  him,  and  with  God,  —  unitarianized, 
atoned.  God  would  gather  all  things  together  in 
one,  unitarianize  all  things.  This  universal  commun- 
ion is  in  our  minds  when  we  speak  of  Unitarianism  ; 
and  such  a  consummation  is  what  we  desire  when 
we  plead  for  the  indoctrination  of  the  children. 

Unitarianism,  I  say,  pervades  the  Gospel ;  it  is 
one  of  its  reigning  characteristics.  There  is  no  Trin- 
itarianism  in  any  part  of  it.  Christ  came  on  a  Uni- 
tarian purpose,  to  unite,  to  atone  all  men,  by  bring- 
ing them  into  union  with  himself,  and  with  God  the 
Father  of  all.  There  is  indeed  none  other  God  but 
one.  We  are  baptized  into  one,  united.  Unitarian 
body,  and  we  pray  for  the  time  when  there  shall  be 
but  one  Shepherd  and  one  fold.  I  am  not  quibbling 
in  this  use  of  terms  ;  I  disdain  to  play  upon  words. 
This  is  the  solemn  and  deep  meaning  of  things  ;  and 
this  spirit  and  purpose  of  unity,  so  dear  to  the  heart 
of  Christ,  so  emphasized  by  him  in  the  development 
of  his  scheme  of  redemption,  is  what  makes  up  my 
Unitarianism.     Ask  me  to  give  up  the  word  Unita- 


THE  SABBATH  SCHOOL.  235 

rianism!  You  might  as  well  deprecate  the  fulfil- 
ment of  that  prayer  of  Christ  wherein  he  so  yearned 
for  the  unity  of  his  disciples.  Unitarianism  has  no 
taint  of  sectarism.  It  stands  for  the  absolute  and 
universal  truth  of  God.  I  would  have  the  children, 
in  this  highest  and  holiest  sense,  in  this  evangelical 
and  truly  orthodox  sense,  in  head  and  in  heart,  in 
sentiment  and  in  life,  unitarianized,  —  atoned,  unified, 
united  to  God  and  Christ  and  one  another,  to  the 
God  of  nature  and  the  universe. 

Unitarianism,  as  we  define  it,  as  we  would  have  it 
taught,  as  it  lies  in  the  Bible,  is  no  shallow  thing,  no 
half-way  system,  no  cold  dogma,  no  barren  state- 
ment. It  is  life  and  spirit.  It  is  like  Christ,  its 
great  representative,  unto  us  wisdom  and  sanctifica- 
tion  and  redemption.  It  rises,  indeed,  into  the  sub- 
limest  region  of  speculation  ;  but  it  stays  not  there, 
it  condescends  to  our  very  feet,  it  grapples  with  the 
whole  of  our  being,  the  full  circle  of  time  and  eter- 
nity. There  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Fatherhood  of 
God,  taught,  illustrated,  beaming  like  the  sun,  all 
through  Scripture.  There  is  the  doctrine  of  univer- 
sal brotherhood, — rare,  precious,  august  doctrine  of 
Christianity.  There  is  the  doctrine  of  the  dignity, 
the  worth  of  human  nature,  upon  which  the  churches 
round  about,  the  preaching  round  about,  a  thousand 
influences  round  about,  are  perpetually  crowding,  but 
which  is  to  be  reasserted  and  defended,  and  incul- 
cated over  and  over  again  ;  a  doctrine  often  declared 
and  always  implied  in  Scripture ;  implied  in  every 
law  God  has  given,  in  every  dispensation  he  has 
made ;  implied  alike  in  cursing  and  beatitude,  alike 


236  T£IE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

in  penalty  and  reward  ;  implied  in  the  very  fact  of 
sin,  in  the  possibilities  of  guilt,  in  all  the  heinousness 
of  transgression,  as  well  as  in  the  beauty  of  holiness 
and  the  joys  of  virtue. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  repentance,  and  the  doc- 
trine of  regeneration,  or  the  spiritual  birth,  the  birth, 
growth,  and  maturity  of  the  spirit. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  all  the 
interest  of  its  nature,  and  richness  of  its  suggestions, 
so  full  of  personal,  practical,  needed  life  to  each  one 
of  us. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  faith ;  not  altogether  as 
an  absolute  sentiment,  but  connecting  itself  with  ev- 
ery other  doctrine  and  feeling. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  election  ;  not  a  narrow, 
partial  limitation  of  God's  grace,  but  that  large,  lib- 
eral, comprehensive  scheme  of  mercy,  which  em- 
braced Gentile  as  well  as  Jew,  and  which  is  so  lumi- 
nously and  cheerfully  set  forth  by  the  Apostle  Paul. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  second  coming, 
the  reproduction  of  his  image  in  the  heart  and  life 
of  the  disciple,  replete  with  valuable  thought  and 
stirring  significance. 

There  is  the  doctrine  of  kindness  towards  wicked 
men,  and  patient  efforts  in  the  spirit  of  love  to  win 
them  back  to  virtue ;  the  doctrine  of  compassion  for 
the  poor,  the  intemperate,  the  slave,  the  Indian,  the 
oppressed,  and  the  unfortunate  of  every  name. 

Time  would  fail  me  to  enumerate  a  tithe  of  the 
glorious  doctrines  of  the  blessed  Gospel  of  the  Son 
of  God.  The  Bible  is  full  of  them  ;  he  that  runs 
may  read.     Every  word  of  Christ  is  a  doctrine.     Ev- 


THE  SABBATH  SCHOOL.  237 

ery  act  of  Christ  is  a  doctrine.  We  are  not  turned 
over,  we  will  not  turn  these  children  over,  to  musty, 
dry,  cheerless,  metaphysical  fables  and  genealogies  ; 
we  come  rather  to  themes  which  drop  as  the  rain 
and  distil  as  the  dew;  we  open  to  the  fair  page  of 
heaven's  own  writ,  and  there  enter  upon  subjects  of 
most  engaging  interest  which  have  been  accumulat- 
ing from  eternity  for  the  use  of  rational  man.  Let 
me  urge  upon  you  all  a  more  familiar  acquaintance 
with  the  Bible.  And  if  you  do  not  always  find  the 
doctrines  of  which  I  have  spoken  systematically  and 
formally  treated  there,  be  sure  they  will  be  found 
appearing  more  or  less  distinctly  in  every  lesson  you 
may  give  out.  Let  them  become  clear  conceptions, 
distinct  ideas,  in  the  minds  of  the  children.  Let 
them  be  impressed  upon  them  as  great  central  relig- 
ious principles.  Let  them  be  intellectually  under- 
stood and  heartily  believed.  I  would  have  every 
child  as  familiar  with  these  great  doctrines  as  he  is 
with  that  fundamental  political  doctrine  that  all  men 
are  created  free  and  equal,  or  with  the  arithmetical 
doctrine  that  multiplication  is  the  reverse  of  division. 
But  what  shall  we  do  with  those  fables  and  gene- 
alogies to  which  reference  has  been  made  ?  Of 
course  they  are  not  to  be  taught,  but  to  be  sedu- 
lously untaught.  They  circumscribe  us  on  every 
hand,  they  accost  us  at  every  turn, —  Trinity  and 
total  depravity.  I  would  have  the  mind  of  the  child 
disabused  in  respect  of  these,  and  their  corollaries. 
I  would  have  those  passages  clearly  explained  in 
which  any  fancy  such  ideas  to  be  taught.  They  are 
not  the  organic  doctrines  of  the  New  Testament^ 


238  THE    SABBATH    SCHOOL. 

and  have  only  been  superinduced  by  the  misinterpre- 
tations of  men.  Will  anybody,  dares  anybody,  af- 
firm that  the  Trinity  is  a  leading,  or  even  a  subsidi- 
ary, doctrine  or  teaching  of  Jesus  ?  There  is  lan- 
guage, I  know,  that  seems  to  imply  the  Roman 
Catholic  notion  of  transubstantiation,  that  the  bread 
of  the  communion  really  becomes  Christ's  body  ; 
there  is  language  that  seems  to  import  that  a  child 
must  really  hate  his  mother ;  and  language  that  ap- 
parently teaches  that  a  righteous  man  shall  always 
be  a  rich  man,  and  the  like.  But,  I  take  it,  the  in- 
tellisrent  teacher  in  these  and  all  such  cases  will  ex- 
ercise  common  sense,  and  especially  compare  Scrip- 
ture with  Scripture. 

This  indoctrination  is,  in  the  last  analysis,  inchris- 
tianization  ;  it  is  focalizing  upon  the  mind  of  the 
child  those  heaven-born  truths  which  are  scattered 
all  through  the  pages  of  nature  and  revelation  ;  it  is 
binding  as  with  hooks  of  steel  the  soul  and  mind  of 
Jesus  to  the  souls  and  minds  of  the  children. 

Tne  prophecy  of  Paul  has  been  fulfilled,  that  the 
time  would  come  when  men  would  not  endure  sound 
doctrine,  but,  after  their  own  lusts,  should  take  to 
themselves  teachers,  having  itching  ears,  and  they 
should  turn  away  their  ears  from  the  truth,  and  be 
turned  unto  fables.  By  all  the  solemnities  of  God, 
by  all  the  value  of  the  soul,  by  Tabor  and  Gethsem- 
ane,  by  the  cross  and  by  the  crown,  are  we  bound 
to  revive  and  to  relume,  to  teach  and  to  preach,  the 
same  sound  doctrine  of  which  the  Apostle  speaks. 


SERMON    XIII 


THE   COMMUNION. 

WHAT   MEAN   YE   BY   THIS    SERVICE  ? —ExoduS   XU.   26. 

This  question  refers  to  the  Passover,  an  institu- 
tion the  origin  of  which  is  related  in  the  chapter 
from  which  the  text  is  taken,  and  one  devoutly  cher- 
ished by  the  Jews  from  the  time  of  its  foundation, 
fifteen  hundred  years  before  Christ,  and  still  kept  up 
wherever  that  singular  race  is  dispersed  over  the  face 
of  the  earth.  At  the  time  of  its  introduction,  Moses 
says  to  the  people :  "  This  day  shall  be  for  a  memo- 
rial ;  and  ye  shall  keep  it  a  feast  unto  the  Lord 
throughout  your  generations  ;  ye  shall  observe  this 
thing  for  an  ordinance  to  thee  and  thy  sons  for  ever. 
And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  your  children  say 
unto  you.  What  mean  ye  by  this  service  ?  that  ye 
shall  say.  It  is  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord's  passover, 
who  passed  over  the  houses  of  the  children  of  Israel 
in  Egypt,  when  he  smote  the  Egyptians  and  deliv- 
ered our  houses." 

The  universality  of  the  observance  of  this  sacra- 
ment among  the  Jews  is  a  point  worthy  to  be  re- 
marked.    It  was  kept   by  men,    women,    and  chil- 


240  THE    COMMUNION. 

dren,  indiscriminately  ;  families,  villages,  cities,  unit- 
ed in  the  celebration.  The  blood  of  the  paschal 
lamb  was  sprinkled  on  every  house.  All  persons 
partook  of  the  unleavened  bread.  So  careful  were 
they  that  the  entire  community  should  be  included, 
and  so  fearful  were  they  lest  some  should  refuse  to 
join  in  its  celebration,  that  from  a  passage  in  Num- 
bers it  has  been  conjectured  that,  if  any  one  should 
wilfully  abstain  from  the  service,  he  might  be  put  to 
death.  If  an  individual  were  sick,  or  on  a  journey, 
or  otherwise  unavoidably  prevented  from  participa- 
tion in  it,  he  was  not  allowed  to  pretermit  it  entirely, 
but  only  to  postpone  its  due  observance. 

Our  Saviour,  we  read,  would  keep  the  Passover 
with  his  disciples.  A  room  was  prepared,  the  proper 
materials  were  collected,  and  they  all  reclined  to- 
gether around  the  table.  At  that  time,  and  under 
those  circumstances,  still  preserving  the  great  idea  of 
the  thing,  he  changes  a  Jewish  into  a  Christian  or- 
dinance. He  offers  the  bread,  which  represents  his 
body  broken,  and  the  wine,  wherein  is  signified  his 
blood  ;  in  other  words,  he  invites  a  participation  in 
that  which  symbolizes  his  entire  sacrifice  in  life  and 
death  for  the  good  of  the  world,  which  was  the  seal 
of  the  new  covenant  which  God  made  through  him 
with  the  whole  family  of  man.  It  is  there  he  says. 
Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me.  Accordingly,  soon 
after  his  death,  as  we  read,  the  disciples  of  Christ 
began  to  keep  this  festival,  thus  modified  in  its  fea- 
tures and  transformed  in  its  intents,  as  a  memorial 
of  their  Lord.  And  we  know  that  the  practice,  vari- 
ously understood  and  variously  employed,  has  con- 
tinued from  that  time  to  our  own  day. 


THE    COMMUNION.  241 

We  learn,  moreover,  from  history,  that  in  the  first 
ages  of  Christianity,  the  observance  of  this  Christian 
ordinance  was  as  universal  as  that  of  the  Passover 
had  been  among  the  Jews ;  that  old  and  young, 
men,  women,  and  children,  belonging  to  what  may 
be  called  the  Christian,  in  distinction  from  the  Jew- 
ish or  Pagan  community,  united  in  its  celebration. 
We  are  told  that,  in  the  first  years  of  our  faith,  heads 
of  families  administered  the  commemorative  bread 
and  cup  to  their  households,  and  pajrents  to  their 
children. 

The  practice  of  a  general,  not  to  say  universal 
communion,  prevails  even  now  in  a  large  portion  of 
Christendom.  We  are  wont  to  attribute  the  idea 
now  so  prevalent  in  New  England,  that  only  a  select 
portion  of  a  Christian  congregation  should  be  com- 
municants, while  the  rest,  practically  the  great  mass, 
should  keep  aloof  from  this  ordinance,  —  we  are 
wont,  I  say,  to  impute  this  idea  to  our  Puritan  fore- 
fathers. But  this  is  a  great  mistake.  They,  for  the 
most  part,  regarded  baptism  as  an  introduction  to  the 
Church,  and  as  they  practised  infant  baptism,  it  so 
came  about  that  the  mass  of  the  population,  in  their 
time,  were  church-members,  and,  of  course,  commu- 
nicants. The  custom  which  we  are  familiar  with, 
and  which  has  come  to  be  so  common,  sprung  up 
more  than  a  century  after  the  Pilgrims  landed  at 
Plymouth.  It  originated  with  Whitefield,  at  the 
time  of  the  Great  Awakening,  so  called,  which  he 
set  in  motion  between  the  years  1740  and  1750.  I 
do  not  say  that  questions  touching  this  matter, 
which  Whitefield  determined,  had  not  been  agitated 

21 


242  THE    COMMUNION. 

before  his   day.     Doubtless  they  had  been.     Some 
dispute  had  already  arisen  among  the  Colonial  cler- 
gy ;   but  Whitefield  put  a  finishing  stroke  to  it.     It 
was  a  cardinal  doctrine  with  him,  that  no  man  should 
be  a  communicant  who  had  not  been  miraculously 
converted.     From  this  period  dates  a  series  of  events 
of  no  small  interest  to   the  New  England  churches. 
A  tone  was  then  given  to  the  popular  feeling  that 
has  lasted  to  the  present  hour.     From  it  has  resulted 
the  singular,  anomalous,  and  lamentable  fact,  that  the 
number  of  communicants  has  been  decreasing  every 
year,  until  at  this  moment  it  bears  a  less  proportion 
to  the  mass  of  the  population,  in  New  England,  than 
ever  before.     In  the  year  1650,  twenty  years   after 
the  settlement  of  Boston,  there  were  forty  churches 
in  New  England,  with  seven  thousand  seven  hun- 
dred and  fifty  members  ;  a  number  which  was  about 
equal,  I  think,  to  the  whole  of  the  adult  population. 
The  innovation  of  Whitefield,  introduced  at  a  crisis 
of  high  religious  excitement,  and  acting   upon  ele- 
ments of  the  most  ductile  and  plastic  sort,  corrupted 
and  perverted   the  churches.      Those  who  had  the 
most  repute  for  zeal  and  piety  adopted  it ;   the  rest 
were  stigmatized  as  secular  and  profane.     No  man 
was  admitted  to  church  privileges  unless  he  could 
recount,  with  the   precision   of  a  leger,   operations 
which  are  declared  in  Scripture  phrase  to  be  like  the 
blowing  wind  and  the  growing   corn.     The    clergy 
assumed  the  jurisdiction  of  sacred  rites.     They  re- 
ceived and  they  rejected  whom  they  chose.     Persons 
of  sincere  piety  and  spotless  life  were  denied  admis- 
sion to  the  Church.     The  effect  was,  on  multitudes 


THE    COMMUNION.  243 

of  minds,  to  render  the  Lord's  Supper  distasteful, 
and  to  create  a  belief  that  the  ordinance  was  of  sec- 
ondary importance.  Men  came  to  the  conclusion 
that  they  could  reach  heaven  without  the  agency  of 
this  sacrament. 

It  was  under  circumstances  like  these  that  Liberal 
Christianity  made  its  appearance  in  the  history  of 
the  times.  Liberal  Christians  built  churches,  settled 
ministers,  and  provided  in  all  ways  for  the  perpetua- 
tion of  religious  institutions.  But  where,  alas!  is 
the  Communion  ?  It  never  recovered  from  the  blow 
it  had  received.  It  has  lingered  along  in  its  wound- 
ed state,  degraded,  neglected,  and  almost  forgotten. 
Years  ago,  good  men,  excluded  from  it,  were  forced 
to  ask,  "  Of  what  use  is  it  ?  Cannot  we  be  saved 
without  it  ?  "  And  so,  while  they  revived  and  hand- 
ed down  to  us  the  primitive  and  apostolic  worship, 
they  failed  to  revive  all  the  primitive  and  apostolic 
usages. 

Thus,  in  a  short  space  of  time,  did  the  fanaticism  of 
one  man  —  eloquent  and  untiring  he  certainly  was 
—  suffice  to  upset,  in  these  New  England  States,  a 
system  in  some  of  its  principal  features  as  old  as 
the  patriarchs,  which  had  been  remodelled  and  per- 
petuated by  Christ,  and  which  had  come  down  from 
confessors  and  martyrs,  through  all  phases  and  fluc- 
tuations of  the  Church,  to  the  middle  of  the  last  cen- 
tury. And  such  is  the  perplexed  and  unhappy  posi- 
tion of  the  Liberal  Church  at  this  day.  What  is  the 
remedy  ?  I  see  none  but  a  swift  return  to  the  foun- 
dation on  which  the  Prophets  and  the  Apostles  stood. 
And  now  once  more  the  question  arises,  "  What 


244  THE    COMMUNION. 

meaneth  this  service  ?  "  A  summary  answer  is  given 
in  the  words  of  Scripture.  It  is  for  a  sign  and  a  me- 
morial, which  shall  be  to  us  and  to  our  children  for 
ever.  In  the  words  of  Christ,  we  do  it  in  remem- 
brance of  him. 

But  allow  me  here  a  little  breadth  of  remark.  And 
referring  generally  to  subjects  of  sentiment  and  feeling, 
I  might  ask.  Of  what  use  are  a  multitude  of  things  ? 
For  instance,  Of  what  use  is  it  to  shake  hands,  or  to 
employ  terms  of  salutation  or  benediction,  in  meet- 
ing or  parting  ?  True  friendship  rests  not  for  proof 
on  acts  like  these,  and  one  may  be  an  arrant  hypo- 
crite therein.  But  suppose  these  courteous  customs 
should  cease  from  human  intercourse ;  would  that 
be  well  ?  Why  do  we  employ  the  expletive  "  Sir," 
or  "  Ma'am,"  in  our  affirmations  and  negations  with 
our  parents  and  elders  ?  The  Quakers  answer  sim- 
ply "  No  "  and  "  Yes."  Would  you  like  to  have  your 
children  imitate  that  practice  ?  These  things  are 
for  a  sign  and  a  memorial.  Of  what  use  is  a  bow 
when  friends  pass  each  other  in  the  street  ?  It  is 
but  a  tilt  of  the  vertebrae  of  the  neck,  a  dash  into  the 
air  of  the  capital  member  of  the  body.  Yet,  let  an 
acquaintance  fail  thus  to  testify  his  recognition,  and 
you  feel  at  once  what  the  force  of  that  little  move- 
ment is.  It  is  a  sign,  a  memorial.  It  is  a  proof  of 
familiar  recognition,  of  friendly  regard.  But  it  does 
not  follow,  I  admit,  that  all  who  bow  in  passing  are- 
really  your  friends. 

I  might  enumerate  quite  a  list  of  the  habitual 
courtesies  of  life,  and  ask,  Of  what  possible  use  are 
they  ?     An  extreme  utilitarianism  might  be  puzzled 


THE    COMMUNION.  245 

to  discover  it.  The  logic  of  airy  transcendentalism 
on  the  one  hand,  or  icy  materialism  on  the  other, 
well  aimed,  might  demolish  the  whole  code.  How 
easy  for  sarcasm  and  ridicule  to  turn  them  into  con- 
tempt. One  may  be,  I  shall  not  take  it  upon  me  to 
gainsay,  a  very  good  man,  he  may  even  love  God 
with  all  his  heart  and  his  neighbor  as  himself,  he 
may  be  industrious,  benevolent,  philanthropic,  and 
never  shake  hands  with  anylpody  or  bow  when  he 
walks  the  street.  But  what  then  ?  Shall  we  dis- 
card or  neglect  those  gentle  amenities  ?  They  are 
signs  and  memorials.  They  are  exponents  of  ideas  ; 
they  are  expressions  of  feeling  ;  they  are  a  kind  of 
articulate  speech,  the  universal  pantomime  of  the 
heart. 

But  may  not  a  man  observe  all  the  courtesies  of 
manner,  and  yet  be  base,  most  unprincipled  at  heart? 
Truly  he  may.  One  may  smile  and  smile  and  be  a 
villain  still.  Possibly  there  are  some  who  put  on  an 
aspect  of  politeness,  as  some  do  a  profession  of  relig- 
ion, as  a  convenient  and  current  mask  for  selfishness, 
duplicity,  and  fraud.  Suppose  one  should  thus  rea- 
son with  himself:  "  Where  is  the  use  of  being  cour- 
teous, polite,  or  civil  ?  It  all  amounts  to  nothing. 
It  is  nothing,  in  fact,  but  words  and  looks  and  tone. 
There  are  certain  persons  of  my  acquaintance,  very 
finished  gentlemen,  —  they  have  the  reputation  of 
being  the  very  mirrors  of  gentility.  But  I  know  them 
well.  They  are  bad  men.  They  covet  fields,  and  take 
them  by  violence,  pervert  the  judgment  of  the  stran- 
ger, and  take  the  widow's  ox  for  a  pledge.  For  my- 
self, I  will  never  more  pretend  to  civility  or  courtesy.'' 

21* 


246  THE    COMMUNION. 

What  should  we  think  of  the  reasonableness  of  such 
a  deduction  as  that  ? 

Let  us  take  one  or  two  illustrations  from  another 
class.  There  is  the  marriage  ceremony,  which  we 
might  challenge  in  the  same  way.  What  does  it 
amount  to  ?  There  is  not  necessarily  any  heart  in 
it.  People  have  been  known  to  join  hands,  bestow 
rings,  and  plight  their  troth,  without  a  particle  of 
affection  in  their  hearts.  Even  the  best-intentioned 
vows  are  easily  broken,  and  scores  do  not  live  up  to 
their  wedding  covenant.  Why  not,  then,  dispense 
with  all  these  seals  and  tokens  ? 

There  is  the  temperance  pledge,  to  which  many 
attach  great  value  and  importance.  The  same  ques- 
tion still  returns,  "  Of  what  real  use  is  it  ?  "  Cannot 
a  man  be  strictly  temperate,  are  there  not  countless 
numbers  of  men  who  are  thus  temperate,  who  have 
never  taken  that  pledge  ? 

Let  me  take  even  so  familiar  a  thing  as  a  letter 
from  a  friend,  from  a  child  if  you  will,  and  I  ask. 
What  does  it  signify?  Your  child  can  love  you, 
think  of  you,  cherish  the  most  filial  feelings  towards 
you,  and  yet  not  write  you  a  single  line.  But  if  a 
child  of  yours,  long  absent,  should  be  thus  silent,  it 
would  be  a  great  grief  upon  your  heart.  The  letter 
in  such  cases  becomes  a  sign,  an  invaluable,  joyous 
sign  and  monument  of  remembrance  and  affection. 

So  I  might  take  up  the  whole  range  of  symbolism, 
and  show  its  extent  and  importance,  —  how  it  enters 
into  human  intercourse,  and  manifests  itself  in  all 
the  circumstances  and  conditions  of  our  being,  and 
seems  to  exercise  an  important  office  in  the  develop- 


THE    COMMUNION.  247 

ment  and  history  of  the  race.  But  whatever  I  might 
advance  on  the  subject  in  general,  as  well  as  what 
has  been  already  said  of  particular  instances,  has  an 
application  to  this  question  of  the  utility  of  the  Com- 
munion. Obviously,  it  is  for  a  sign  and  a  memorial, 
and  that,  too,  of  events  the  most  wonderful,  and  of  a 
person  the  most  august,  that  have  illustrated  the  his- 
tory of  our  world.  We  raise  a  monument  to  Wash- 
ington, and  celebrate  his  birth  with  cannon-roar  and 
chime  of  bells,  with  bonfires,  processions,  and  eulogy. 
Sometimes  monuments  are  erected  to  public  men  of 
lesser  note,  to  keep  alive  and  deepen  the  memory  of 
their  deeds.  And  some,  no  doubt,  are  ready  to  say, 
that  all  memorials  of  this  sort  are  best  preserved  in 
the  heart,  that  these  outward  and  material  tokens  of 
affection  and  interest  are  really  irrational  and  useless. 
Yet,  as  we  have  already  said,  a  desire  for  some  pal- 
pable expression  of  this  sort  is  revealed  in  the  con- 
duct of  every  man  every  day  of  his  life ;  and  we 
might  justly  conclude,  that  on  the  whole  it  approves 
itself  to  his  reason  and  is  agreeable  to  his  nature. 

Undoubtedly  the  practice  may  be  carried  too  far. 
A  sign  may  exist  where  there  is  nothing  signified,  it 
may  be  continued  when  all  true  devotion  to  the  object 
commemorated  has  perished  from  the  mind.  A  sign 
may  originate  from  puerile  or  superstitious  causes, 
it  may  be  maintained  by  arts  at  once  vile  and  mis- 
chievous, it  may  be  employed  by  bad  men  for  the 
worst  of  purposes.  Romanism,  and  other  collateral 
branches  of  the  Church,  if  I  understand  the  matter 
right,  is  full  of  such  perversions.  In  the  English 
Church,  I  believe,  no  one  can  receive  the  sacred  em- 


248  THE    COMMUNION. 

blems  except  upon  his  knees.  This  was  ostensibly 
a  sign  of  humility,  but  it  likewise  became  an  instru- 
ment of  despotism.  But  need  we  in  this  discussion 
concern  ourselves  with  extravagance  and  perversion  ? 
We  know  enough  of  that  exists.  Instances  will  oc- 
cur to  almost  any  mind  without  the  pains  of  looking 
them  up.  No  good  thing  has  ever  yet  appeared,  that 
has  not  at  some  period  or  other,  or  in  some  form  or 
other,  been  abused. 

The  case  before  us  is  simply  this.  Christ,  —  if  we 
are  not  in  an  error,  if  we  do  not  mistake  in  the  prem- 
ises, —  Christ  instituted  the  Communion  Supper  as 
a  sign  and  a  memorial,  to  be  observed  by  his  follow- 
ers in  all  generations :  and  the  brief  question  is,  Will 
we  observe  it?  As  rational,  consistent  men,  will 
we  yield  obedience  herein  ?  Will  we  consent  to 
this  symbolic  rite,  as  we  do  in  so  many  other  in- 
stances in  our  daily  life?  The  same  objections  may 
be  set  up  to  this  as  are  urged  against  memorials  of 
other  sorts ;  but  as  regards  the  latter,  we  have  seen 
how  little  weight  they  are  allowed  to  have.  Why, 
then,  should  we  suffer  them  to  embarrass  us  in  re- 
spect to  this  ? 

There  is  another  consideration  bearing  upon  this 
subject,  of  no  small  interest,  and  in  some  respects  of 
special  magnitude,  affecting  and  sinking  down  into 
our  deepest  meditations,  and  awakening  the  liveliest 
solicitude.  I  mean,  that  just  at  this  stage  of  human 
history,  at  this  precise  juncture  of  popular  affairs, 
when  art  is  busy,  and  trade  maketh  haste  to  be  rich, 
when  innumerable  forms  of  material  good  occupy 
the  hands  and  absorb  the  imagination,  when  politics 


THE    COMMUNION.  249 

is  winning  the  multitudes  to  its  shrine,  there  is  dan- 
ger —  shall  I  not  say  great  danger  ?  —  of  our  forget- 
ting and  wholly  neglecting  Christian  duty,  spiritual 
obligations,  and  the  salvation  of  the  soul.  Instead 
of  diminishing  their  number,  we  ought  rather  to  give 
more  heed  to,  and  multiply,  the  signs  and  memorials 
of  a  religious  faith.  And  this  is  what  we  do  in  other 
matters.  When  danger  is  supposed  to  threaten  the 
political  union  of  the  States,  when  disregard  of  the 
Constitution  or  of  some  enactment  of  Congress  seems 
to  be  on  the  increase,  then  men  talk  to  us  the  more 
about  Washington,  they  repeat  his  Farewell  Address, 
they  print  it  over  and  over  again,  they  circulate  it  in 
all  directions ;  then  they  celebrate  his  birthday  with 
unusual  pomp;  then  the  building  of  his  monument 
goes  cheerfully  forward.  All  this  is  thought  to  be  the 
part  of  wisdom,  of  discernment,  of  sound  common- 
sense,  to  say  nothing  of  enlightened  and  earnest 
patriotism.  Who  ventures  to  inquire,  in  such  a  case, 
What  is  the  use  ?  Men  feel  that  there  is  a  use  in 
having  and  employing  these  signs  and  memorials. 
But  is  there  no  need,  is  there  no  propriety,  in  pre- 
serving and  multiplying  monuments  to  Christ,  our 
spiritual  Saviour?  For,  really,  if  we  would  but  ob- 
serve the  commemorative  Supper  as  we  should,  if  we 
would  revive  a  long  dormant  interest  in  that  tender 
rite,  it  would  be  like  raising  new  monuments  to  Jesus. 
To  return  to  the  point  to  which  reference  was 
made  in  the  opening  of  this  discourse.  The  Jewish 
Passover  was  for  all  the  people ;  the  Lord's  Supper, 
which  takes  the  place  of  it,  is  likewise  for  all  the  peo- 
ple.    This  festival  is  as  much  for  the  people  as  the 


250  THE    COMMUNION. 

Sabbath  is,  as  prayer  or  preaching  is,  as  the  sun  and 
the  rain  are.  It  would  be  perfectly  absurd,  at  the 
very  least  it  would  be  irrational  and  inhuman,  to  in- 
stitute a  religious  sign  and  memorial,  that  should  not 
be  for  all  the  people.  What  would  be  thought  and 
said,  if  those  who  are  constructing  the  monument  to 
Washington  in  the  city  that  bears  his  name  should 
decree  that  only  a  limited,  a  select  portion  of  the 
people,  such  as  the  managers  themselves  might 
deign  to  choose,  should  visit  and  inspect  that  lofty 
memorial  ? 

The  Lord's  Supper  is  for  a  sign  and  a  memorial 
of  Christ,  —  of  his  character,  of  his  goodness,  his 
sacrifice;  it  is  a  sign  of  God's  mercy  to  us  in  Christ. 
Moreover,  on  our  part,  it  is  a  sign.  Of  what  ? 
That  one  has  been  miraculously  converted  ?  There 
is  no  such  thing.  It  is  a  sign  of  a  belief  in  Christ ; 
and  we  all  are  to  some  good  degree  believers  in  him. 
It  is  a  sign  of  some  interest  in  the  Christian  salva- 
tion. This  is  what  it  is  a  sign  of;  it  is  not  positive 
proof,  any  more  than  many  other  signs  we  employ 
are  proofs  of  what  they  signify.  Keeping  the  Sab- 
bath is  a  sign  of  regard  to  the  God  of  the  Sabbath, 
yet  many  who  observe  the  day  may  possibly  have 
no  such  regard. 

It  is  a  sign  for  us  and  for  our  children.  Yes! 
That  is  it.  We  feel  in  regard  to  Washington,  in 
regard  to  our  venerated  forefathers,  that  whatever  per- 
tains to  them  is  for  a  sign,  not  only  for  us,  but  also 
for  our  children.  So  is  this  commemorative  Chris- 
tian ordinance  for  the  children.  This  was  the  idea 
in  the  Jewish  dispensation.     It  was  the  idea  in  the 


THE    COMMUNION.  251 

Christian  dispensation.  I  mean,  that  the  primitive 
disciples,  the  early  Fathers  of  the  Church,  adminis- 
tered the  sacraments  to  their  children.  "What,  then, 
wait  we  for  ?  For  George  Whitefield  and  the  sen- 
timent with  which  he  inoculated  the  country  ?  The 
turn  he  gave  to  the  popular  mind  on  this  subject  has 
only  rendered  the  Communion  a  stumbling-block  to 
many,  has  seriously  diminished  its  influence,  and 
threatens  the  utter  extinction  of  the  ordinance  in  this 
portion  of  Christendom.  For  the  last  forty  years  re- 
vivals or  seasons  of  extraordinary  religious  excite- 
ment have  alone  supplied  the  dwindling  ranks  of  the 
so-called  members  of  the  Church.  Since  the  memo- 
rable year  1831,  these  unusual  phenomena  have  been 
less  and  less  frequent,  and  the  number  of  communi- 
cants has  been  diminishing  in  an  equal  ratio. 

But  I  would  that  this  religious  sign  and  memorial, 
this  festive  and  commemorative  Christian  rite,  might 
more  and  more  abound.  There  is  no  danger  of  a 
liberal,  enlightened,  rational  community  making  too 
much  of  it.  Indeed,  that  is  not  the  alternative  which 
alarms  our  fears.  The  rite  exists,  it  has  been  author- 
itatively established  by  Christ  himself,  it  has  perpet- 
uated itself  in  all  ages  of  the  Church.  We  all  recog- 
nize its  propriety.  But  it  has  been  obscured,  scan- 
dalized ;  it  lies  baried  beneath  a  pile  of  cant,  error, 
and  perversion. 

Will  we  attempt  to  restore  it,  my  friends  ?  If  we 
do  not  make  the  attempt,  if  Liberal  Christians  do 
not  come  to  the  rescue  and  rally  for  its  recovery, 
then  this  Christian  ordinance,  so  far  as  the  New 
England    Congregational    Church   is    concerned,   is 


252  THE    COMMUNION. 

threatened,  I  fear,  with  ultimate  and  complete  ex- 
tinction. 

I  would  revive  it  for  the  intrinsic  excellence  of  its 
subjective  power.  The  Communion  is  a  season  of 
great  reflective  interest ;  it  suggests  deep  and  solemn 
thoughts;  its  prevailing  effect  is  calm,  temperate, 
quiet  meditation.  It  makes  us  serious,  but  not  sad  ; 
it  subdues  without  depressing  us.  If  we  set  a  higher 
value  on  this  sacrament,  if  we  entered  upon  it  with 
greater  freedom,  if  it  were  upheld  by  a  more  general 
sympathy,  if  all  classes  and  all  ages  were  unrestrained 
from  uniting  in  it,  I  venture  to  say  that  nothing 
in  the  varied  and  eventful  history  of  our  lives  would 
impart  to  us  more  solid  satisfaction,  or  contribute 
more  to  those  indefinable  but  palpable  impressions 
that  form  the  character,  and  travel  on  with  us  from 
youth  to  manhood  and  old  age.  We  should  antici- 
pate the  periods  of  this  holy  festival  with  joy,  and 
the  experience  of  them  would  be  savory  and  inspir- 
ing. In  our  solitary  thought  we  should  recur  to 
them  with  avidity,  and  at  the  hour  of  death  we  should 
look  back  upon  them  with  composure  and  peace. 

I  would  revive  it  for  the  sake  of  its  sanctifying  ef- 
fect. It  keeps  us  from  sin,  and  quenches  our  inclina- 
tion to  it;  and  this  by  a  very  direct  and  intelligible 
process.  It  brings  us  into  immediate  contact  with 
what  is  holy  ;  its  suggestions  are  holy,  its  author  is 
holy.  When  temptation  assails  us,  and  the  powers 
of  darkness  threaten  our  security,  if  there  be  a  spot 
to  which  one  can  flee  for  refuge,  it  is  the  table  of  the 
Lord. 

I  would  revive  it  for  the  sake  of  its  cementing 


THE    COMMUNION.  253 

element.  A  free  participation  in  the  Communion 
promotes  the  beauty,  the  edification,  and  strength  of 
the  local  Church.  What  sight  could  be  more  pleas- 
ing than  this  large  body  of  men,  women,  and  children 
fellowshipping  one  another,  banding  together  for  the 
highest  spiritual  purpose,  and  bearing  testimony  to 
their  mutual  interest  in  the  great  salvation  ?  Hav- 
ing eaten  and  drunk  one  with  another,  having  shared 
together  the  hospitality  of  our  Lord,  having  sat  down 
together  in  that  banqueting-house  where  the  banner 
over  us  is  love,  would  not  our  hearts  be  more  close- 
ly knit,  our  contrarieties  be  extinguished,  and  our 
whole  life  move  on  in  greater  harmony  and  satisfac- 
tion ?  Such  an  exercise  would  seem  to  be  "  an 
opening  of  the  way,  a  highway  for  our  Lord."  Could 
the  example  spread,  if  there  could  be  a  general  and 
devout  observance  of  this  rite  in  every  congregation, 
could  there  be  at  some  season  of  the  year  a  mass 
Communion,  a  meeting  of  the  entire  city  to  celebrate 
their  Saviour's  death,  truly  we  should  feel  that  the 
millennial  day  had  dawned.  By  such  a  spectacle  our 
youths  would  early  become  wedded  to  the  Church, 
nor  would  the  busy  pursuits  of  manhood  alienate 
them  from  it. 

The  Communion  is  not  so  much  a  test  as  an  aid 
of  character.  If  it  be  in  any  sense  the  reward  of  at- 
tainment, it  is  also  the  harbinger  of  hope.  Its  as- 
pect is  not  always  towards  the  past,  but  its  gaze  is 
also  directed  to  the  future,  and  it  points  not  so  much 
to  the  fruits  of  past  experience  as  to  the  crown  that 
is  to  be  acquired.  It  addresses  not  a  select  class,  but 
the  average  condition  of  men.     It  does   not   offer 


254  THE    COMMUNION. 

itself  to  the  ripe  believer  exclusively,  uor  does  it  fol- 
low the  incorrigible  sinner  to  compel  him  to  come 
in  ;  but  seating  itself,  so  to  speak,  within  the  open 
area  of  the  Church,  it  benignantly  extends  its  benefits 
to  the  assembled  congregation. 

My  friends,  I  have  no  undue  attachment  to  the 
rites  of  the  Church.  Technically  speaking,  we  have 
but  two,  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  Protes- 
tantism and  Puritanism. have  made  sweeping  work 
with  the  trappings  and  the  furniture  of  the  old 
Church.  Little  is  left  to  us  save  the  bare  walls. 
Only  these  two  rites  remain.  I  think  our  position, 
liberal,  rational,  intellectual,  free,  admirably  fits  us 
to  take  a  just  account  of  them.  We  may  strip  them 
of  superstition,  and  still  regard  them  with  reverence ; 
we  may  dissipate  the  mystery  that  has  hitherto  en- 
veloped them,  and  carefully  preserve  the  original 
structure  ;  we  may  rescue  them  from  the  dominion  of 
a  blind  faith,  and  associate  them  with  the  analogies 
of  the  sharpest  intellectuality  ;  we  may  love  them 
without  worshipping  them,  and  be  benefited  by  them 
without  becoming  dupes.  We  accept,  we  cherish 
the  Communion  as  a  means  of  grace,  an  institu- 
tion designed  to  bring  and  keep  us  near  to  Christ, 
an  instrumentality,  which,  like  prayer,  like  the  Sab- 
bath, like  preaching,  God  will  bless  to  our  redemp- 
tion and  ultimate  sanctification. 


SEEMON  XIV 


THE  GOSPEL:    GOOD  NEWS  TO  ALL  PEOPLE. 

I   BRING   TOU    GOOD    TIDINGS    OF    GREAT    JOT,    WHICH    SHALL    BE 

TO  ALL  PEOPLE.  —  Luke  ii.  10. 

Good  or  glad  tidings.  I  would  invite  attention 
to  the  word  and  to  the  thing.  First,  the  word. 
There  are  two  terms,  the  Greek,  Evangel,  and  the 
Saxon,  Gospel,  both  meaning,  in  common  English, 
good  news,  glad  tidings.  The  text  may  read  thus: 
I  bring  you  the  Gospel  of  great  joy.  I  remark  that, 
wherever  the  word  Gospel  is  found  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, it  means  this  glad  tidings,  good  news.  The 
Gospel  according  to  John  is  the  good  news  accord- 
ing to  John.  Christ  says.  Repent  and  believe  the 
Gospel,  believe  the  glad  tidings,  the  joyful  intelli- 
gence. Mark  commences  his  history  in  this  wise  : 
"  The  beginning  of  the  Gospel,"  the  glad  tidings,  "  of 
Jesus  Christ."  "  Woe  to  me,"  says  Paul,  "  if  I  preach 
not  the  Gospel,"  the  good  news. 

Again,  the  word  to  preachy  in  the  New  Testament, 
is  from  the  same  evayyeXtov,  evangel^  and  means 
to   announce   news.      The   two   words,  preach  the 


256  THE    GOSPEL  I 

Gospel,  are  in  the  original  often  contained  in  one 
word,  meaning  to  announce,  proclaim,  declare  intel- 
ligence. "We  read,  "  The  disciples  departed,  preach- 
ing the  Gospel,"  that  is,  announcing,  making  the  glad 
announcement,  telling  the  tale.  The  noun  evangel, 
gospel,  means  good  news,  and  the  verb  evangelize, 
gospelize,  means  to  announce  or  proclaim  good  news. 
We  read  of  Philip  the  Evangelist,  and  "  some  proph- 
ets, some  evangelists,"  that  is,  annunciators,  messen- 
gers. Our  word  angel  comes  from  this  same  root, 
eu-angel ;  and  angel  means  literally  a  messenger  or 
relater  of  news.  There  is  in  the  Bible  no  adjective 
evangelical.  There  is  evangel,  good  news ;  evange- 
lize, to  announce  good  news ;  evangelist,  the  annun- 
ciator of  good  news  ;  but  no  evangelical.  Evangel- 
ical is  a  word  of  modern  composition.  It  really 
means  that  which  relates  to  the  glad  tidings.  An 
evangelical  church,  or  an  evangelical  doctrine,  is  a 
church  or  doctrine  containing  the  good  news.  In 
the  text,  then,  the  angel  or  messenger  of  God,  said, 
I  evangelize  you.  I  tell  you  good  news,  glad  tidings. 
So  far,  then,  the  word  evangel,  gospel,  tidings,  means 
no  more  than  the  word  neivs,  intelligence,  informa- 
tion. 

Secondly,  the  thing.  What  was  this  good  news, 
this  Gospel?  What  did  the  angel  announce?  For 
a  newspaper  to  say.  We  have  received  some  valuable 
information,  some  very  interesting  news,  is  saying 
nothing.  What  is  the  information,  or  news,  is  the 
point  that  alone  concerns  us.  What  was  the  pleas- 
ant intelligence  of  the  heavenly  messenger?  He 
came  a  great  way,  as  we  may  well  suppose,  on  an 


GOOD   NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPLE.  257 

important  errand.  What  was  the  errand  ?  In  plain 
words,  what  was  the  Gospel  ?  Christ  went  about 
preaching  the  Gospel,  announcing  the  glad  tidings. 
What  did  Christ  preach  or  announce  ?  His  last  com- 
mand was,  Go,  preach  the  Gospel,  go,  tell  the  glad 
tidings,  to  all  nations.  What  pleasant  intelligence 
was  to  be  conveyed  to  all  nations  ?  I  say  the  word 
evangel,  gospel,  neivs,  intelligence,  means  nothing ; 
it  is  simply  a  vehicular  term.  The  great  question  is, 
What  is  the  news  or  evangel,  what  is  the  thing  con- 
veyed to  us?  "Glad  tidings";  tidings  of  what? 
The  messenger  has  arrived,  and  he  has  something  to 
tell  us ;  tell  us  what  ?  It  is  something  good,  it  is 
good  news,  an  evangel,  a  gospel.  We  are  all  the 
more  curious  to  know  what  it  is. 

Is  it,  as  our  Universalist  brethren  teach,  that  all 
will  go  to  heaven  when  they  die  ?  That  certainly 
were  good  news.  Is  it,  as  our  Calvinistic  brethren 
teach,  that  only  certain  ones,  the  specially  elect,  the 
irresistibly  moved,  will  be  saved  ?  That  would 
hardly  fulfil  the  promise  of  the  messenger,  since 
he  says  it  is  good  news  for  all  people.  Is  it,  as  our 
Roman  Catholic  brethren  teach,  that  such  only  as 
are  baptized  will  be  saved  ?  I  think  it  is  not  any  of 
these  things.  Is  it  news  that  a  babe  is  born,  Christ 
the  Saviour  ?  But  that  does  not  explain  its  full  pur- 
port. For  still  the  inquiry  arises.  What  is  that  little 
babe  to  do  ?  How  is  he  to  promote  the  happiness 
of  mankind  ?  It  is  news  of  peace  on  earth.  Glori- 
ous, ecstatLp  intelligence!  But  merely  announcing 
peace  does  not  silence  the  noise  of  battle,  or  beat 
swords   into    ploughshares    or   spears   into  pruning- 

22* 


258  THE  GOSPEL : 

hooks.  There  is  a  mystery  in  this  affair,  a  mystery 
of  the  Gospel  or  good  news,  not  yet  perfectly  solved. 
It  is  called  the  Gospel  or  good  news  of  the  blessed 
God ;  that  is,  it  comes  from  God  ;  and  the  Gospel  or 
good  news  of  Christ,  because  it  relates  to  Christ; 
and  the  Gospel  or  good  news  of  salvation,  because 
it  concerns  our  deliverance  from  sin  and  evil.  But 
none  of  these  meet  the  question  fully. 

By  all  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  it  is 
called  the  Gospel,  or  good  news,  of  the  kingdom,  and 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.     And  as  I  have  said  the 
word  good  neivs  is  contained  in  the  original  words 
rendered  to   preachy  so  where  it  says  Christ  and  the 
Apostles  went  preaching  the  kingdom  of  God,  the 
same  is  meant  as  if  it  said  they  went  announcing 
the  good  news  or  proclaiming  the  glad  intelligence 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.     This,  then,  brings  the  sub- 
ject a  little  more   into   the  region  of  familiar  ideas. 
The    mystery    begins   to    unfold.     It  is    something 
about  a  kingdom,  a  kingdom  of  God   here  on  the 
earth.     Now  we  read  that  the  law,  the  Mosaic  law, 
and  the   prophets,  were  until  John,  but  since  that 
time  the  kingdom  of  God  is  preached,  evangelized, 
proclaimed.     Something  new  is  to  take   place.     A 
new  dispensation  of  God  in  the  affairs  of  men  is 
promised,  and  it  is  called  the  kingdom  or  sovereignty 
or  intimate  rule  and  communication  of  God.     This 
kingdom    Christ  went   everywhere    preaching,    pro- 
claiming ;    he  told  all   his  disciples  to   preach  it,  he 
ordered  it  to  be  preached  to  all  nations  under  heav- 
en ;  he  illustrated  it  in  his  teachings  by  the  mustard- 
tree,  a  farmer  sowing  seed,  leaven,  hidden  treasure, 


GOOD    NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPi^E.  259 

a  fisherman's  net.  He  said  he  that  was  least  in  that 
kingdom  was  greater  than  John  ;  that  this  kingdom 
was  not  here  or  there,  but  in  us  ;  that  little  children 
belonged  to  it.  The  good  news,  gospel,  or  evangel, 
then,  was  that  God,  Jehovah,  the  Supreme  One,  was 
to  be  sovereign,  legislator,  father,  the  portion  and 
hope  of  all  men.  "  So,"  says  the  angel,  "  I  bring 
you  good  news  of  great  joy,  which  shall  be  to  all 
people."  So  Christ  says  to  all  men.  Repent,  reflect, 
change  your  minds,  ponder  deeply  the  matter,  for 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand.  We  read  that 
Joseph  of  Arimathea  was  one  who  waited  for  the 
kingdom  of  God.  There  was  much  curiosity  aroused 
on  the  subject,  and  many  misapprehensions ;  people 
-did  not  perfectly  understand  Christ,  and  they  begun 
to  ask  him  when  the  kingdom  of  God  should  come. 
When  Paul  was  taken  to  Rome,  and  the  people  be- 
gan to  crowd  about  him,  to  hear  what  he  had  to  say, 
w^e  read  that  he  expounded  and  testified  the  kingdom 
of  God  unto  them. 

But  this  is  called  neius.  What  was  there  new 
about  it.  Had  not  God  always  reigned  in  the  earth  ? 
In  a  sense  he  had.  But  there  w^ere  many  false  gods, 
there  was  much  superstition,  much  wrong  and  vio- 
lence. People  had  not  the  knowledge  of  the  one 
true  God.  They  did  not  know  of  the  infinite,  eter- 
nal, unitary  Truth  and  Goodness.  They  did  not 
know  that  God  really  loved  them,  that  the  Creator  of 
all  and  the  immanent  Life  of  the  universe  was  their 
Father  in  heaven.  The  little  children  in  the  wilds 
of  Scythia  were  never  taught  to  pray,  Our  Father 
which  art  in  heaven.     The  armed  phalanxes  of  the 


260  THE    GOSPEL : 

Roman  empire  had  never  been  taught  to  feel  that  all 
men  were  their  brothers.  It  was  news  to  the  Athe- 
nians, that  God  who  made  the  world  needed  not 
temples  to  dwell  in,  and  that  all  men  were  made  of 
one  blood.  It  was  news  to  the  Samaritans,  that  a  per- 
son of  Jewish  extraction  could  imagine  God  could  be 
worshipped  anywhere  else  than  at  Jerusalem.  The 
Syrophenician  woman  thought  her  place  was  with 
the  dogs  under  the  table.  The  Christian  movement 
was  a  novelty  in  the  earth. 

But  it  was  not  wholly  a  new  thing.  It  was  indeed 
a  very  old  thing,  —  so  old,  men  had  lost  the  memory 
of  it.  Let  us  remark  that  Paul  says  the  Gospel,  the 
good  news,  was  preached  before  unto  Abraham.  A 
very  long  time  ago,  then,  this  thing  had  been  spoken 
of.  What  was  this  old  evangel,  this  message  to  the 
ancient  Patriarch  ?  The  Gospel  had  been  preached 
unto  Abraham,  saying.  In  thee  shall  all  the  nations 
of  the  earth  be  blessed.  The  tenor  of  the  Gospel  or 
glad  tidings  to  Abraham  was  precisely  similar  to 
that  of  the  angels  at  the  Nativity,  or  that  by  Jesus 
Christ.  Here  there  is  a  remarkable  coincidence.  If 
Paul  is  to  be  trusted,  the  same  Gospel  or  glad  tidings 
of  which  Christ  was  the  minister  had  been  announced 
years  before  to  Abraham.  The  Gospel  or  good  news 
to  Abraham,  summarily  stated,  was  the  annunciation 
of  God's  most  gracious  purposes  towards  the  whole 
human  race.  The  Gospel  or  good  news  by  Jesus 
Christ  was,  then,  a  very  old  thing.  At  the  same  time 
it  was  a  new  thing,  inasmuch  as  the  great  mass  of 
mankind  had  never  heard  or  dreamed  of  it,  and  those 
who  were  in  proper  possession  of  the  fact,  the  Jews, 


GOOD  NEWS  TO  ALL  PEOPLE.         261 

seemed  wholly  to  have  forgotten  it.  God  did  enter 
into  covenant  with  Abraham  and  with  his  seed  for 
ever,  and  did  promise  that  in  him  and  his  seed  all 
nations  should  be  blessed. 

This  covenant  seems,  I  say,  to  have  been  forgot- 
ten. The  record  of  it,  preserved,  indeed,  in  the  sa- 
cred books  of  the  Jews,  was  overlooked,  or  at  least 
misapprehended.  Here  was  a  guaranty  of  universal 
grace,  so  to  say,  under  the  hand  and  seal  of  Jeho- 
vah, which  slumbered  amidst  the  musty  archives  of 
things  that  were.  There  was  no  unitary  God,  no 
unitary  humanity,  no  unitary  spirit.  The  Jews 
loathed  the  Samaritans,  the  barbarians  yelled  in  the 
woods,  the  Romans  ravaged  the  world.  Yet  thought- 
ful minds  had  ever  remembered  these  things  ;  the 
fires  of  a  true  philanthropy  burned  in  here  and 
there  a  breast.  There  were  those  in  every  nation 
who  feared  God  and  worked  righteousness.  Many 
a  heart  presaged  the  better  day  coming.  It  was  im- 
possible for  a  Jew  even  to  read  the  words  of  Isaiah 
or  the  other  prophets,  without  a  presentiment  of  a 
change  at  hand. 

Under  these  circumstances,  Luke  introduces  us  to 
the  two  family  groups,  that  of  the  priest  Zacharias, 
supposed  to  be  at  Hebron  in  the  hill-country  of 
Judea,  and  of  the  carpenter  Joseph,  at  Nazareth. 
The  wives  of  these  two  persons,  Elizabeth  and  Mary, 
who  were  cousins,  became  miraculously  with  child. 
Mary  goes  to  Hebron  to  visit  her  cousin.  All  par- 
ties trembled  with  anticipation.  Great  events  were 
astir,  in  which  they  were  particularly  interested.  Al- 
ready the  promise  of  the   angel  to  Mary  was,  that 


262  THE  gospel: 

that  which  should  be  bom  of  her  should  be  called  the 
Son  of  the  Highest,  that  he  should  rule  over  the 
house  of  Jacob,  and  that  of  his  kingdom  there  should 
be  no  end.  Now,  Mary,  filled  with  a  holy  spirit, 
utters  these  remarkable  words :  I  rejoice  in  Jeho- 
vah ;  surely,  in  what  is  about  to  transpire,  God  is 
very  gracious  unto  us.  His  mercy  is  on  them  that 
fear  him,  from  generation  to  generation.  He  hath 
holpen,  or  in  this  he  does  help  his  servant  Israel,  as 
he  spake  to  our  fathers^  to  Abraham,  and  to  his  seed 
forever.  Presently  Elizabeth's  full  time  came,  and 
the  neighbors  assembled  to  congratulate  with  her  on 
the  event  of  the  birth.  The  child  John  is  treated 
after  the  manner  of  their  law.  Zacharias,  the  father, 
who  had  been  dumb,  regained  his  speech,  and  in  the 
midst  of  the  wondering  company,  filled  with  a  holy 
spirit,  being  spiritually  moved,  blesses  the  Lord  God 
of  Israel,  in  that  he  had  raised  up  a  horn  of  salva- 
tion to  the  people,  and  that  the  dayspring  was  about 
dawning  on  the  world,  to  give  light  to  them  that  sit 
in  darkness  and  in  the  shadow  of  death,  the  Gentiles ; 
to  perform  the  mercy  promised  to  our  fathers^  and  to 
remember  his  holy  covenant^  the  oath  ivliich  lie  sivare 
to  our  father  Abraham.  Mary  leaves  Hebron,  and 
we  next  hear  of  her  at  Bethlehem,  where  Christ 
is  born.  And  now  the  angels  appear,  using  the 
words  of  our  text :  I  bring  you  the  Gospel,  the 
"  good  tidings  of  great  joy,  which  shall  be  to  all 
people." 

I  submit  that  here  is  a  remarkable,  a  significant 
concatenation  of  events.  The  old  Abrahamic  cove- 
nant is  kept  in  view  from  beginning  to  end.     It  all 


GOOD  NEWS  TO  ALL  PEOPLE.         263 

turns,  in  the  minds  of  parties  concerned  at  least,  on 
the  oath  sworn  to  Abraham,  that  in  him  should  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  be  blessed.  This  was  the 
Gospel,  the  good  news,  preached  before  to  him  ;  this 
was  the  Gospel  Moses  recognized  when  he  said,  "  A 
prophet  like  unto  me  shall  the  Lord  your  God  raise 
up  unto  you  " ;  this  was  the  Gospel  reflected  in  all 
the  utterances  of  the  prophets  ;  this  was  the  Gospel, 
the  glad  tidings,  the  angel  Gabriel  announced  to 
Elizabeth  ;  this  was  the  Gospel  or  good  tidings  the 
angel  of  the  Lord  announced  to  the  shepherds ;  this 
was  the  Gospel  or  good  new^s  Christ  and  his  Apos- 
tles went  everywhere  preaching.  Finally  and  sum- 
marily, this  is  THE  Gospel,  the  evangel,  the  good 
news.  In  other  words,  the  news  was,  as  we  have 
Seen,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  was  come,  a  univer- 
sal, divine,  glorious  kingdom,  to  embrace  all  nations  ; 
or,  in  previous  style  of  language,  it  was  that  the  cov- 
enant, the  old  Abrahamic  covenant,  that  had  been 
narrowed  to  Judea,  was  to  enlarge  its  boundaries  so 
as  to  include  the  whole  human  race. 

The  first  preacher  of  the  Gospel  was  Jehovah,  in 
the  annunciation  to  Abraham  ;  the  next,  in  the 
way  of  expectation  and  forecast,  was  Isaiah ;  the 
next,  the  angels  mentioned  by  Luke  ;  the  next,  Jesus ; 
and  after  him,  the  Apostles.  Here  is  one  continuous 
thing,  so  to  say,  in  the  Divine  mind,  partially  devel- 
oped in  the  course  of  ages  by  holy  men  of  old,  w4io 
spake  as  they  were  moved  by  a  pure  and  heavenly 
spirit,  and  brought  perfectly  to  light  in  the  Son  of 
Mary.  Now  the  purpose  of  Jehovah  begins  to  work 
its  way  in  human  affairs ;  now  it  initiates  itself  into 


264  THE    GOSPEL  : 

human  history.  Christ,  who  studied  the  mind  of 
God,  who  was  ever  in  communion  with  the  Spirit  of 
God.  after  his  baptism  and  unction,  in  the  ripeness 
of  his  years,  and  perfect  growth  in  grace,  endowed 
with  special  powers,  commences  the  labor  of  the  in- 
auguration of  the  empire  of  the  Supreme.  The  one 
God,  the  true  doctrine  of  whom  the  Jews  had  ever 
preserved,  shall  reign  over  the  mixed  varieties  and 
multiplied  shapes  of  thought  and  opinion.  The  wor- 
ship of  the  one  Infinite  Intelligence,  that  made 
heaven  and  earth,  shall  enter  alike  the  polished  tem- 
ples of  the  Greeks  and  the  rustic  fanes  of  the  Druids. 
The  partition-walls  that  have  so  long  divided  the 
human  family  shall  be  broken  down.  All  are  the 
offspring  of  one  God,  all  are  made  of  one  blood,  and 
universal  love  shall  override  the  boundaries  of  states 
and  supplant  the  strifes  of  neighborhoods.  Neither 
Jewish  nor  Gentile  altar  need  any  longer  burn  with 
fire,  or  reek  with  blood  ;  for  God,  who  is  a  spirit,  is  to 
be  worshipped  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  Once,  when  the 
earth  was  filled  wath  violence,  God  destroyed  it  with 
a  flood.  He  will  do  so  no  more.  There  forever 
hangs  his  bow  in  the  clouds,  the  token  of  his  cove- 
nant to  this  effect.  He  will  bless  and  save  mankind. 
Even  the  Gentiles,  who  have  been  so  long  strangers 
from  the  covenant  of  promise,  shall  be  so  no  more, 
but  shall  be  fellow-heirs  and  citizens  of  the  house- 
hold of  faith.  The  wild  olive  shall  be  grafted  into 
the  cultured  stock.  This  was  a  sore  point  with  the 
Jews.  They  insisted  that  none  but  such  as  had  been 
circumcised  and  kept  the  law  should  be  reckoned  of 
the  common  body.     This  was  the  trying  point  with 


GOOD    NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPLE.  265 

Christ.  The  advocacy  of  this  principle,  so  funda- 
mental to  the  Divine  plan,  cost  him  his  life,  as  it  did 
that  of  Stephen. 

We  speak  of  Christianity  as  a  new  religion  ;  it 
was  in  important  respects  both  new  and  old.  We 
speak  of  the  new  covenant  or  testament ;  it  was  also 
an  old  one,  which  God  sware  unto  our  father  Abra- 
ham. Now  the  Gospel  is  not  that  men  should  re- 
pent ;  it  is  the  good  news  that  the  pale  of  the  Divine 
covenant  was  enlarged,  and  men  were  urged  to  repent 
and  change  their  manner  of  life,  and  conform  to  the 
new  conditions.  So  Christ  preached  that  men  should 
repent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was  at  hand.  So 
men  were  everywhere  called  to  repent,  change  their 
minds,  reform  their  ways,  and  practically  accept  the 
good  news.  Nor,  again,  is  the  Gospel  faith  ;  it  is,  I 
say,  good  news,  and  men  were  required  to  have  faith 
in  the  intelligence  thus  brought  to  them,  and  receive 
it  into  their  souls,  and  act  upon  it  in  their  lives. 
Abraham  believed  the  Gospel,  the  good  news  that 
was  announced  to  him,  truly  and  fully  believed  what 
God  told  him,  and  this  faith  of  his  was  accounted 
unto  him  for  righteousness  ;  in  other  words,  an  excel- 
lence acceptable  to  God.  The  faith  is  one  thing, 
and  the  intelligence  on  which  that  faith  acts  is  wholly 
another  thing. 

To  preach  the  Gospel  is  not  the  same  thing  as  to 
preach  faith  and  repentance ;  to  preach  the  Gospel 
is  to  preach  the  good  news  of  God's  gracious  pur- 
pose to  be  the  covenant  God  of  the  whole  race. 
That  is  the  Gospel,  and  faith  and  repentance  are  its 
auxiliaries,  not  its  essence.     For  one  to  repent  and 

23 


266  THE    GOSPEL  I 

believe  the  Gospel  is  to  repent  and  believe  the  good 
news,  and  enter  into  the  covenant  of  God. 

There  are  those  words,  "  Before  Abraham  was,  I 
am,"  —  words  that  have  puzzled  us,  but  which  yet 
contain  an  august,  beautiful  meaning.  There  is  no 
reference  to  the  corporeal  preexistence  of  Christ. 
Before  the  time  of  Abraham,  Christ  says,  these  ideas 
which  I  announce,  this  Divine  purpose  of  blessing 
all  nations  which  I  cherish,  this  great  object  for  which 
I  live  and  am  ready  to  die,  existed ;  it  existed  in  the 
nature  of  things,  it  moved  in  the  thoughts  of  all  the 
good  and  great  of  ancient  time ;  especially  was  it 
part  of  the  everlasting  decrees  of  Jehovah.  It  pre- 
sented itself  to  Abraham  and  to  all  the  prophets 
after  him,  and  in  me  is  it  about  to  come  to  pass. 
Before  Abraham  was,  1  am  ;  that  which  I  represent 
existed.  The  Gospel  is  preached  now,  and  it  was 
preached  before  to  Abraham. 

It  is  of  course  obvious  that  the  word  Gospel  is  fre- 
quently used  not  only  for  news,  but  for  the  substance 
of  that  news  ;  it  passes  from  the  messenger  to  the 
message.  It  often  passes  from  the  mere  announce- 
ment of  the  fact  of  intelligence  into  the  statement  of 
what  that  intelligence  was,  and  stands  for  both  of 
these  things.  Yet  it  adheres  to  the  fundamental 
point,  that  the  news  was  God's  purpose  to  bless  all 
nations. 

Now  this  kingdom  of  God,  this  expanded  cove- 
nant, concerns  human  beings ;  it  brings  men  into  a 
certain  attitude  to  God  and  to  one  another.  Christ 
is  the  mediator,  agent,  of  this  new  order  of  things, 
and  all  assume  an  especial  relation  to  him.    Grouped 


GOOD    NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPLE.  267 

in  this  new  position,  coming  together  in  this  divine 
manner,  with  God  over  all  and  Christ  the  great 
leader,  human  beings  constitute  what  in  Scripture  is 
called  a  Church,  or  the  assemblage,  the  great  society 
and  fellowship  of  human  beings.  And  Christ  says, 
"  On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church."  Church, 
empire  of  God,  holy  covenant  relations,  are  tanta- 
mount terms.  This  Church,  what  we  now  call  the 
Christian  Church,  takes  in  Jew  and  Greek,  barbarian 
and  Scythian,  bond  and  free  ;  families,  communities, 
whole  nations.  The  Gospel  or  good  news  was  that 
the  great  mass  of  human  beings  were  comprehended 
in  the  Divine  plans.  This  is  essential,  obvious  in  all 
Scripture.  The  Gospel  means  this,  or  it  means  ab- 
solutely nothing. 

What  the  angels  came  to  announce,  then,  was 
precisely  such  a  purpose.  This  is  the  mystery  of  the 
Gospel,  and  nothing  else  is  that  mystery.  As  Paul 
says,  I  have  come  into  the  full  knowledge  of  the 
mystery  of  Christ,  which  in  other  ages  was  not  made 
known  unto  the  sons  of  men,  as  it  is  now  revealed 
unto  the  holy  apostles  and  prophets,  teachers,  that 
the  Gentiles  should  be  felloiv-heirs^  and  of  the  same 
body,  and  partakers  of  God's  promise^  the  old  Abra- 
hamic  promise,  in  Christ.  And  to  me  is  given  to 
preach  to  the  Gentiles  the  unsearchable  riches  of 
Christ,  to  make  all  men  see  what  is  the  fellowship, 
the  commonness  of  the  mystery  which  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  world  had  been  hid  in  God,  who  cre- 
ated all  things  by  Jesus  Christ,  who  did  all  the  great 
work  by  Jesus.  The  angels  at  the  Nativity  came 
flushed  and  palpitating  with  this  mystery,  the  myste- 


268  THE    GOSPEL  : 

rious  intelligence  that  had  been  so  long  hid,  which 
was,  which  solely  was,  which  simply  was,  that  not  the 
Jews  alone,  but  the  Gentiles,  that  all  nations,  through 
Christ,  should  be  blessed  of  God.  This  was  the  mys- 
tery that  angels  desired  to  look  into,  this  was  what 
had  haunted  the  hopes  and  hearts  of  good  men  in 
all  ages. 

But  how  should  it  come  about  ?  How  shall  these 
others  become  with  us  partakers  and  fellow-heirs  ? 
How  shall  the  pale  of  brotherhood  and  love  be  en- 
larged ?  Christ  shall  do  it.  Unto  you  is  born  this 
day,  in  the  city  of  David,  a  Saviour,  a  deliverer,  one 
who  shall  extricate  you  from  your  sad  dilemma  and 
save  you  from  the  dreadful  consequences  of  your 
sins  ;  "  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles  and  the  glory 
of  my  people  Israel "  .'  The  secret  is  at  last  out,  the 
mystery  is  revealed,  the  oath  sworn  to  Abraham  shall 
yet  be  fulfilled.  The  news  has  come,  the  glad  tidings, 
the  Gospel  of  the  abounding  grace  of  God  is  now  to 
be  made  known.  Christ  comes  to  preach  this  Gos- 
pel ;  he  will  proclaim  the  glad  tidings,  he  will  un- 
dertake the  work  of  covenant  enlargement,  he  will 
establish  God's  kingdom  in  the  earth,  he  will  build 
upon  the  deep  foundations  the  Church  Universal. 
To-day  is  Christmas,  Christ's  festival  occasion ;  we 
celebrate  the  initiation  of  these  wonderful  events. 
The  sole  reason  why  we,  descendants  of  the  barbar- 
ous Anglo-Saxon  tribes,  uncircumcised  Gentiles,  are 
permitted  to  meet  here  to-day,  in  this  pure,  elevated, 
civilized  way,  is,  that  Christ  did  break  down  the 
Jewish  pale,  and  let  the  covenant  blessings  of  God 
flow  over  the  world.     Christ  might  have  lived  and 


GOOD    NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPLE.  269 

died  as  he  was  born,  a  Jew,  a  good  Jew,  pious,  be- 
nevolent, exemplary,  loving.  That  was  not  his  mis- 
sion ;  that  was  not  why  God  raised  him  np  ;  that 
would  not  have  accomplished  the  oath  sworn  to 
Abraham  ;  it  would  have  left  the  world  just  as  he 
found  it.  No ;  through  prayers  and  tears  in  his 
own  soul,  through  temptations,  through  exhaustion 
and  weariness,  he  must  advance  to  his  great  work, 
even  if  the  vista  terminate  in  a  dreadful  hill,  sheet- 
ed with  darkness  and  surmounted  with  a  cross ;  even 
if  his  blood,  every  pulse  of  which  beat  with  love  for 
humanity,  by  human  hands  should  be  torturously 
wrung  from  his  heart. 

It  was  suitable  that  the  Gospel,  the  good  news, 
should  be  proclaimed  of  angels,  in  mid-air.  They 
rose  above  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  they  stood  aloft 
where  they  could  overlook  the  boundaries  of  Jewry ; 
the  whole  earth  was,  as  it  were,  spread  out  beneath 
their  feet;  and  they  flung  the  rosy  token,  the  glad 
voice  of  salvation,  to  remotest  nations,  when  they 
declared  the  Evangel  was  for  all  the  people. 

When  the  angels  sung  their  Messianic  hymn  of 
peace  on  earth,  good-will  toward  men ;  when,  in 
after  years,  Christ  sat  with  his  disciples  on  the  moun- 
tain, and  opened  to  them  the  great  principles  of  his 
universal  kingdom ;  when  Paul,  on  his  way  to  Da- 
mascus, stricken  by  that  marvellous  apparition,  re- 
ceived the  commission  which  distinguished  him  as 
the  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  ;  —  in  the  North  of  Ger- 
many, near  the  mouth  of  the  Elbe,  on  the  neck  of 
the  Danish  peninsula  and  a  few  adjacent  islands, 
dwelt  a  people  of  nomadic,  Scythian  origin.     Their 

23* 


270  THE  gospel: 

abode  was  a  tract  of  alternate  marshes  and  wooded 
mountains;  the  shore  was  lashed  and  darkened  by 
the  wild  storms  that  sweep  down  the  northern  seas. 
They  had  a  blonde  complexion,  light  hair,  and  blue 
eyes.  Their  clothes  were  short,  and  made  of  skins, 
they  wore  their  hair  of  a  great  length,  their  faces 
were  painted  and  tattooed  after  the  manner  of  the 
New-Zealanders.  They  lived  in  huts  woven  of 
brush  and  plastered  with  clay,  and  sometimes  made 
their  abode  in  caves  of  the  earth.  They  were  igno- 
rant, rude,  idolatrous,  and  addicted  to  superstition. 
They  described  the  Supreme  Being  as  the  father  of 
combats  and  slaughter,  and  reckoned  those  his  fa- 
vorite children  who  fell  on  the  field  of  battle.  They 
possessed  a  free  and  resolute  spirit,  which  signalized 
itself  by  alternate  deeds  of  reckless  daring  and  en- 
sanguined ferocity.  They  sacrificed  human  beings 
to  their  Gods. 

Such  were  the  Anglo-Saxons  prior  to  their  inva- 
sion of  Britain.  They  ultimately  became  a  body  of 
pirates,  as  terrible  as  the  world  has  ever  known  ;  they 
scourged  every  sea  with  the  fear  of  their  name,  and 
the  savageness  of  their  assaults.  Of  these  people, 
in  a  direct  line,  are  we  descendants.  Yet  for  these, 
too,  Christ  came.  Following  them  in  their  career  of 
conquest,  the  message  of  heavenly  love  crossed  the 
British  Channel;  and  while  they  were  laying  the 
foundations  of  a  new  empire  on  English  soil,  the 
truths  of  his  Gospel  came  and  dwelt  among  them. 
These  barbarous  tribes  were  embraced  in  God's 
covenant.  They,  too,  were  included  among  the  na- 
tions to  whom  the  Gospel  was  to  be  preached. 


GOOD    NEWS    TO    ALL    PEOPLE.  271 

Through  that  eternal  purpose  of  God,  which  made 
all  nations  to  be  partakers  of  his  grace,  we  behold 
ourselves  rescued  from  the  thraldom  of  ancient  su- 
perstition, purged  of  bloody  rites,  elevated  above  huts 
and  caves  and  a  lawless  buccaneer  life,  and  permit- 
ted this  day  to  offer  a  pure  worship  to  the  Universal 
Father  in  a  civilized  sanctuary.  Thus  I  trace  the 
progress  of  the  great  Evangel ;  thus  I  see  unfolded 
the  magnificent  projects  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth ;  thus  I 
discern  the  divinity  of  the  mission  of  the  Son  of 
God.  I  this  day  rejoice  in  that  free  grace  which, 
breaking  down  the  barriers  of  sectarian  exclusiveness, 
reached  and  reconciled  us  who  were  aliens  from  the 
commonwealth  of  Israel  and  strangers  to  the  cove- 
nant of  promise,  and  makes  us  fellow-citizens  with 
the  saints,  and  of  the  household  of  God,  according 
to  the  eternal  purpose  which  he  purposed  in  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord. 


APPENDIX 


NOTE  A. 


The  associated  action  referred  to  by  Mr.  Judd  in  his 
letter,  from  which  a  quotation  is  given  in  the  Preface  to  this 
volume,  may  be  seen  in  the  following  extract  from  the 
Preamble  to  the  Constitution  of  "  The  Association  of 
THE  Unitarian  Church  of  Maine,"  which  was  unani- 
mously adopted  by  the  Unitarian  Convention  held  in  Port- 
land in  September,  1852. 

"  We,  the  Unitarian  Christians  of  Maine,  ourselves  and 
our  posterity,  are  a  Church ;  a  part  of  the  Church  Uni- 
versal, of  the  Church  of  God  and  Christ  ;  a  Church  Con- 
gregational, Evangelical,  Apostolic.  We  are  the  Church, 
not  of  creeds,  but  of  the  Bible  ;  not  of  a  sect,  but  of  Hu- 
manity ;  seeking  not  uniformity  of  dogma,  but  communion 
in  the  religious  life.  We  embrace  in  our  fellowship  all 
who  will  be  in  fellowship  with  us. 

"  Locally,  and  in  a  limited  sense,  a  collection  or  society 
of  Christians  is  a  church. 

"  These  Christians,  with  their  families,  uniting  in  regular 
assembly,  for  religious  worship,  instruction,  growth,  and 
culture,  having  the  ordinances  and  a  pastor,  constitute  a 
parochial  church. 

"  These  Christians,  with  their  families,  in  any  city,  town, 
or  precinct  of  the  State,  not  having  the  forms  and  means 


274  APPENDIX. 

of  regular  religious  service,  and  without  a  pastor,  consti- 
tute an  unparocliial  church. 

"  These  several  churches,  considered  as  a  whole,  consti- 
tute THE  Unitarian  Church  of  Maine." 


NOTE  B.    Pase  199. 


Mr.  Judd,  in  the  very  commencement  of  his  ministry, 
felt  that  the  mere  number  of  church-memhers,  according 
to  the  prevailing  use  of  that  term,  was  no  true  test  of  the 
piety  or  Christian  virtues  of  the  people  he  had  in  charge  ; 
and  holding  that  no  believer  in  Christianity  should  be  iso- 
lated from  the  Christian  Church,  he  urged  upon  all  the 
duty  and  the  privilege  of  observing  all  the  Christian  ordi- 
nances. His  continually  increasing  interest  in  this  vital 
point  led  to  the  full  development  of  his  faith  in  the  Birth- 
right Church. 

In  the  fall  of  1852  he  prepared  a  condensed  statement  of 
his  idea  of  the  basis  of  a  true  church-organization,  for  the 
consideration  of  all  the  members  of  his  parish,  and  for  the 
acceptance  and  signature  of  all  who  should  approve  it. 
Several  social  meetings  were  subsequently  held,  from  week 
to  week,  for  a  general  discussion  of  the  principles  therein 
set  forth,  and  a  free  expression  of  the  most  reserved  minds 
was  thus  obtained.  After  earnest  and  mature  deliberation, 
a  vote  was  finally  taken  at  an  unusually  full  meeting,  and 
the  result  was  an  almost  unanimous  voice  of  approval. 

It  was  this  vote  to  which  Mr.  Judd  alludes  in  the  Discourse 
to  which  this  note  belongs. 

The  statement  referred  to  was  afterward  engrossed  in  a 
Register  prepared  for  the  purpose  ;  and  the  names  of 
nearly  every  family  constituting  Christ  Church  have  been 
subscribed  to  it. 


/ 


